Cargando…

Intrauterine contraceptive device rupture. Follow-up of a retrospective cohort and clinical protocol. RUDIUS study()

OBJECTIVE: Intrauterine device fracture, as we know it today, is an infrequent event, usually described as isolated cases. The purpose of this study was to look for factors influencing intrauterine fragment retention after device rupture. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. A total of 135 pati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cánovas, Esther, Beric, Duska, Jara, Rebeca, Cazorla, Eduardo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8762393/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35071815
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08751
_version_ 1784633751982047232
author Cánovas, Esther
Beric, Duska
Jara, Rebeca
Cazorla, Eduardo
author_facet Cánovas, Esther
Beric, Duska
Jara, Rebeca
Cazorla, Eduardo
author_sort Cánovas, Esther
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Intrauterine device fracture, as we know it today, is an infrequent event, usually described as isolated cases. The purpose of this study was to look for factors influencing intrauterine fragment retention after device rupture. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. A total of 135 patients were recruited, and the cohort follow-up ran for three full years from 2018 to 2020. RESULTS: Thirty-three percent of patients had a retained intrauterine fragment compared to 82 of 123 (66.7%) who had expelled it spontaneously. In the group of patients who had at least one intercurrent period between device fracture and confirmatory fragment persistent test, we found persistence of intrauterine fragment in 18 of 71 (25.4%) patients compared to 53 of 71 (74.6%) who did not (p = 0.047). A total of 6 of 39 (15.4%) of the patients with spontaneous rupture of the device presented with persistence of the intrauterine fragment compared to 32 of 81 (39.2%) of the group with fracture after manipulation (p = 0.006). The mean time elapsed from the fracture to the confirmatory test in the patients who had persistence of the fragment was 26.97 days (range from 0 to 116), while in those who expelled it spontaneously, a mean of 45.59 days (range 7–267) had elapsed (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The main factors positively influencing complete expulsion of the fragmented IUD were elapsed time of 45 days or more, intercurrent menstruation or spontaneous fracture. Therefore, the proposed protocol calls for expectant management for at least 1.5 months after fracture, allowing at least one intercurrent period to elapse prior to any therapeutic manoeuvre.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8762393
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87623932022-01-20 Intrauterine contraceptive device rupture. Follow-up of a retrospective cohort and clinical protocol. RUDIUS study() Cánovas, Esther Beric, Duska Jara, Rebeca Cazorla, Eduardo Heliyon Research Article OBJECTIVE: Intrauterine device fracture, as we know it today, is an infrequent event, usually described as isolated cases. The purpose of this study was to look for factors influencing intrauterine fragment retention after device rupture. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. A total of 135 patients were recruited, and the cohort follow-up ran for three full years from 2018 to 2020. RESULTS: Thirty-three percent of patients had a retained intrauterine fragment compared to 82 of 123 (66.7%) who had expelled it spontaneously. In the group of patients who had at least one intercurrent period between device fracture and confirmatory fragment persistent test, we found persistence of intrauterine fragment in 18 of 71 (25.4%) patients compared to 53 of 71 (74.6%) who did not (p = 0.047). A total of 6 of 39 (15.4%) of the patients with spontaneous rupture of the device presented with persistence of the intrauterine fragment compared to 32 of 81 (39.2%) of the group with fracture after manipulation (p = 0.006). The mean time elapsed from the fracture to the confirmatory test in the patients who had persistence of the fragment was 26.97 days (range from 0 to 116), while in those who expelled it spontaneously, a mean of 45.59 days (range 7–267) had elapsed (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: The main factors positively influencing complete expulsion of the fragmented IUD were elapsed time of 45 days or more, intercurrent menstruation or spontaneous fracture. Therefore, the proposed protocol calls for expectant management for at least 1.5 months after fracture, allowing at least one intercurrent period to elapse prior to any therapeutic manoeuvre. Elsevier 2022-01-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8762393/ /pubmed/35071815 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08751 Text en © 2022 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Research Article
Cánovas, Esther
Beric, Duska
Jara, Rebeca
Cazorla, Eduardo
Intrauterine contraceptive device rupture. Follow-up of a retrospective cohort and clinical protocol. RUDIUS study()
title Intrauterine contraceptive device rupture. Follow-up of a retrospective cohort and clinical protocol. RUDIUS study()
title_full Intrauterine contraceptive device rupture. Follow-up of a retrospective cohort and clinical protocol. RUDIUS study()
title_fullStr Intrauterine contraceptive device rupture. Follow-up of a retrospective cohort and clinical protocol. RUDIUS study()
title_full_unstemmed Intrauterine contraceptive device rupture. Follow-up of a retrospective cohort and clinical protocol. RUDIUS study()
title_short Intrauterine contraceptive device rupture. Follow-up of a retrospective cohort and clinical protocol. RUDIUS study()
title_sort intrauterine contraceptive device rupture. follow-up of a retrospective cohort and clinical protocol. rudius study()
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8762393/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35071815
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08751
work_keys_str_mv AT canovasesther intrauterinecontraceptivedevicerupturefollowupofaretrospectivecohortandclinicalprotocolrudiusstudy
AT bericduska intrauterinecontraceptivedevicerupturefollowupofaretrospectivecohortandclinicalprotocolrudiusstudy
AT jararebeca intrauterinecontraceptivedevicerupturefollowupofaretrospectivecohortandclinicalprotocolrudiusstudy
AT cazorlaeduardo intrauterinecontraceptivedevicerupturefollowupofaretrospectivecohortandclinicalprotocolrudiusstudy