Cargando…

Subfascial‐located contraceptive devices requiring surgical removal

BACKGROUND: Subdermal etonogestrel implants are highly effective contraceptive methods. Despite standardization of insertion technique by the manufacturer, some implants are inadvertently placed too deeply within or below the plane of the biceps brachii fascia. Placement of these implants in a deep...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hellwinkel, Justin E., Konigsberg, Matthew W., Oviedo, Johana, Castaño, Paula M., Kadiyala, R. Kumar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8091535/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33934717
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40834-021-00158-5
_version_ 1783687503096578048
author Hellwinkel, Justin E.
Konigsberg, Matthew W.
Oviedo, Johana
Castaño, Paula M.
Kadiyala, R. Kumar
author_facet Hellwinkel, Justin E.
Konigsberg, Matthew W.
Oviedo, Johana
Castaño, Paula M.
Kadiyala, R. Kumar
author_sort Hellwinkel, Justin E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Subdermal etonogestrel implants are highly effective contraceptive methods. Despite standardization of insertion technique by the manufacturer, some implants are inadvertently placed too deeply within or below the plane of the biceps brachii fascia. Placement of these implants in a deep tissue plane results in more difficult removal, which is not always possible in the office setting. In rare cases, surgical removal by an upper extremity surgeon is warranted. CASE PRESENTATION: Here we present 6 cases of etonogestrel implants located in a subfascial plane requiring removal by an upper extremity surgeon. Implants were all localized with plain radiography and ultrasound prior to surgical removal. All cases had implants located in the subfascial plane and one was identified intramuscularly. The average age was 28 years (19–33) and BMI was 24.0 kg/m^2 (19.1–36.5), with the most common reason for removal being irregular bleeding. The majority of cases (5/6) were performed under monitored anesthesia care with local anesthetic and one case utilized regional anesthesia. All implants were surgically removed without complication. CONCLUSIONS: Insertion of etonogestrel contraceptive implants deep to the biceps brachii fascia is a rare, but dangerous complication. Removal of these implants is not always successful in the office setting and referral to an upper extremity surgeon is necessary to avoid damage to delicate neurovascular structures for safe removal.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8091535
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80915352021-05-04 Subfascial‐located contraceptive devices requiring surgical removal Hellwinkel, Justin E. Konigsberg, Matthew W. Oviedo, Johana Castaño, Paula M. Kadiyala, R. Kumar Contracept Reprod Med Case Report BACKGROUND: Subdermal etonogestrel implants are highly effective contraceptive methods. Despite standardization of insertion technique by the manufacturer, some implants are inadvertently placed too deeply within or below the plane of the biceps brachii fascia. Placement of these implants in a deep tissue plane results in more difficult removal, which is not always possible in the office setting. In rare cases, surgical removal by an upper extremity surgeon is warranted. CASE PRESENTATION: Here we present 6 cases of etonogestrel implants located in a subfascial plane requiring removal by an upper extremity surgeon. Implants were all localized with plain radiography and ultrasound prior to surgical removal. All cases had implants located in the subfascial plane and one was identified intramuscularly. The average age was 28 years (19–33) and BMI was 24.0 kg/m^2 (19.1–36.5), with the most common reason for removal being irregular bleeding. The majority of cases (5/6) were performed under monitored anesthesia care with local anesthetic and one case utilized regional anesthesia. All implants were surgically removed without complication. CONCLUSIONS: Insertion of etonogestrel contraceptive implants deep to the biceps brachii fascia is a rare, but dangerous complication. Removal of these implants is not always successful in the office setting and referral to an upper extremity surgeon is necessary to avoid damage to delicate neurovascular structures for safe removal. BioMed Central 2021-05-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8091535/ /pubmed/33934717 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40834-021-00158-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Case Report
Hellwinkel, Justin E.
Konigsberg, Matthew W.
Oviedo, Johana
Castaño, Paula M.
Kadiyala, R. Kumar
Subfascial‐located contraceptive devices requiring surgical removal
title Subfascial‐located contraceptive devices requiring surgical removal
title_full Subfascial‐located contraceptive devices requiring surgical removal
title_fullStr Subfascial‐located contraceptive devices requiring surgical removal
title_full_unstemmed Subfascial‐located contraceptive devices requiring surgical removal
title_short Subfascial‐located contraceptive devices requiring surgical removal
title_sort subfascial‐located contraceptive devices requiring surgical removal
topic Case Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8091535/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33934717
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40834-021-00158-5
work_keys_str_mv AT hellwinkeljustine subfasciallocatedcontraceptivedevicesrequiringsurgicalremoval
AT konigsbergmattheww subfasciallocatedcontraceptivedevicesrequiringsurgicalremoval
AT oviedojohana subfasciallocatedcontraceptivedevicesrequiringsurgicalremoval
AT castanopaulam subfasciallocatedcontraceptivedevicesrequiringsurgicalremoval
AT kadiyalarkumar subfasciallocatedcontraceptivedevicesrequiringsurgicalremoval