Cargando…

Hysteroscopic sterilization in immunocompromised patients who have intrauterine devices in place: two case reports

INTRODUCTION: The micro-inserts used in the hysteroscopic sterilization procedure elicit a benign occlusive tissue response leading to permanent tubal occlusion. Little is known about whether immunosuppressed patients mount the immunological response necessary to ensure tubal occlusion. Theoretical...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ladanyi, Camille, Field, Carlie, Tocce, Kristina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4624646/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26506838
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13256-015-0729-y
_version_ 1782397828210884608
author Ladanyi, Camille
Field, Carlie
Tocce, Kristina
author_facet Ladanyi, Camille
Field, Carlie
Tocce, Kristina
author_sort Ladanyi, Camille
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The micro-inserts used in the hysteroscopic sterilization procedure elicit a benign occlusive tissue response leading to permanent tubal occlusion. Little is known about whether immunosuppressed patients mount the immunological response necessary to ensure tubal occlusion. Theoretical concern for non-occlusion has limited the use of hysteroscopic sterilization in patients on immunosuppressive therapies. In all patient populations, if an intrauterine device is in place, it is usually removed at the time of hysteroscopic sterilization. Little is known about maintaining intrauterine devices during the 3-month period to tubal occlusion. CASE PRESENTATION: Our patient in case 1 was a 35-year-old Hispanic woman, gravida 2, para 2002, with a history of a living donor kidney transplant. Our patient in case 2 was a 32-year-old Hispanic woman, gravida 3, para 2103, diagnosed with undifferentiated autoimmune disease. Both patients underwent hysteroscopic sterilization. In both cases, a levonorgestrel intrauterine device was in place for contraception. At the time of micro-insert placement, our patients were both on daily immunosuppressive medications, including long-term glucocorticoids. Three months after the hysteroscopic procedure, both patients had successful tubal occlusion, demonstrated by a hysterosalpingogram. CONCLUSION: Hysteroscopic sterilization in an outpatient setting is a reasonable option for sterilization in immunocompromised patients on immunosuppressive therapies. Intrauterine devices can be maintained during the procedure and during the 3-month period to tubal occlusion.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4624646
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46246462015-10-30 Hysteroscopic sterilization in immunocompromised patients who have intrauterine devices in place: two case reports Ladanyi, Camille Field, Carlie Tocce, Kristina J Med Case Rep Case Report INTRODUCTION: The micro-inserts used in the hysteroscopic sterilization procedure elicit a benign occlusive tissue response leading to permanent tubal occlusion. Little is known about whether immunosuppressed patients mount the immunological response necessary to ensure tubal occlusion. Theoretical concern for non-occlusion has limited the use of hysteroscopic sterilization in patients on immunosuppressive therapies. In all patient populations, if an intrauterine device is in place, it is usually removed at the time of hysteroscopic sterilization. Little is known about maintaining intrauterine devices during the 3-month period to tubal occlusion. CASE PRESENTATION: Our patient in case 1 was a 35-year-old Hispanic woman, gravida 2, para 2002, with a history of a living donor kidney transplant. Our patient in case 2 was a 32-year-old Hispanic woman, gravida 3, para 2103, diagnosed with undifferentiated autoimmune disease. Both patients underwent hysteroscopic sterilization. In both cases, a levonorgestrel intrauterine device was in place for contraception. At the time of micro-insert placement, our patients were both on daily immunosuppressive medications, including long-term glucocorticoids. Three months after the hysteroscopic procedure, both patients had successful tubal occlusion, demonstrated by a hysterosalpingogram. CONCLUSION: Hysteroscopic sterilization in an outpatient setting is a reasonable option for sterilization in immunocompromised patients on immunosuppressive therapies. Intrauterine devices can be maintained during the procedure and during the 3-month period to tubal occlusion. BioMed Central 2015-10-28 /pmc/articles/PMC4624646/ /pubmed/26506838 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13256-015-0729-y Text en © Ladanyi et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Case Report
Ladanyi, Camille
Field, Carlie
Tocce, Kristina
Hysteroscopic sterilization in immunocompromised patients who have intrauterine devices in place: two case reports
title Hysteroscopic sterilization in immunocompromised patients who have intrauterine devices in place: two case reports
title_full Hysteroscopic sterilization in immunocompromised patients who have intrauterine devices in place: two case reports
title_fullStr Hysteroscopic sterilization in immunocompromised patients who have intrauterine devices in place: two case reports
title_full_unstemmed Hysteroscopic sterilization in immunocompromised patients who have intrauterine devices in place: two case reports
title_short Hysteroscopic sterilization in immunocompromised patients who have intrauterine devices in place: two case reports
title_sort hysteroscopic sterilization in immunocompromised patients who have intrauterine devices in place: two case reports
topic Case Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4624646/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26506838
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13256-015-0729-y
work_keys_str_mv AT ladanyicamille hysteroscopicsterilizationinimmunocompromisedpatientswhohaveintrauterinedevicesinplacetwocasereports
AT fieldcarlie hysteroscopicsterilizationinimmunocompromisedpatientswhohaveintrauterinedevicesinplacetwocasereports
AT toccekristina hysteroscopicsterilizationinimmunocompromisedpatientswhohaveintrauterinedevicesinplacetwocasereports