Coincidental spontaneous perforation of the small intestine following operative hysteroscopy: A case report.

OBJECTIVE: Operative hysteroscopy is a common gynecologic procedure, but it carries the risk of complications. Spontaneous small intestine perforation is rare and fatal, especially in young adults. We present a spontaneous small intestine perforation after operative hysteroscopy with mimicking sign of uterine perforation after operation hysteroscopy. CASE REPORT: A 30-year-old nulligravida woman underwent Truclear® hysteroscopic polypectomy in the morning in LMD. She suffered from upper abdominal pain in the afternoon. Subsequently, progressive abdominal distention and imminent shock occurred the next morning. Initially, it was supposed to be a case of uterine rupture with internal bleeding. She was transferred to the emergency department of our hospital. Complete biochemistry data and abdominal CT were performed. The CT revealed pneumoperitoneum and ascites. Emergent laparoscopy was arranged. The abdominal cavity was full of intestinal fluid and the myomatous uterus was intact. The surgeon performed a laparotomy, two sites of spontaneous perforation of the small intestine were detected. The patient underwent laparotomic segmental resection and anastomosis and was discharged 14 days after surgery without incident. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of uterine perforation during hysteroscopy is up to 1.6%. The use of non-thermal intrauterine morcellator device (Truclear®) has been shown to significantly reduce the risk of perforation and thermal injury. As this case highlights, we suspected the possibility of uterine perforation immediately after hysteroscopic surgery. However, it happened to be rare spontaneous perforation of small bowel. The patient recovered well after timely transfer and management. Hysteroscopy is a very common procedure in gynecologic clinics, but even relatively safe intrauterine morcellator devices carry risk of complications. As a healthcare provider, we should beware of any comorbidity, for sometimes it would be catastrophic.

Intraperitoneally Retained Contraceptive Device After Uterine Perforation: A Case Report.

A 29-year-old parous woman with a history of a T-shaped copper intrauterine device (IUD) insertion presented 8 months later with a complaint of the contraceptive device being missing. Computed tomography with contrast turned out to be superior to the combined abdominal and pelvic X-ray and transvaginal ultrasound in providing the detailed extrauterine location of the device between the urinary bladder and uterus. A laparoscopy was successful in the atraumatic freeing of the IUD from omental and bladder adhesions, and in its final removal.

Complete perforated bladder from intrauterine devices: A case series report from a nationwide monitoring system.

AIM: Complete perforation of the bladder caused by an intrauterine device (IUD) is rare. This study examined the characteristics of patients associated with IUD-related bladder perforation and evaluated the relationship between mislocated IUDs and their potential complications. METHODS: From October 2005 to December 2021, 13 reports regarding complete perforations to the bladder by IUDs were retrieved from the National Contraceptives Adverse Reaction Monitoring System of China. The clinical features of these cases were analyzed. RESULTS: The median patient age was 30 (range, 27-46) years. There were four cases (4/13, 30.8%) with IUDs placed during lactation, one case (1/13, 7.7%) with an IUD placed after medical abortion, and eight cases (8/13, 61.5%) placed after menstruation. Seven cases (7/13, 53.9%) were first-time IUD users. The median duration of IUD placement was 47 (range, 1-145) months. Unexpected pregnancy was reported in five cases (5/13, 38.5%). Six cases (6/13, 46.2%) reported bladder stones with varying degrees of abdominal pain or urinary tract infection. Removal methods included laparotomy (four cases), cystoscopy (four cases), laparoscopy (two cases), laparoscopy combined with cystoscopy (two cases), and laparotomy after cystoscopy (one case). All IUDs were successfully removed. CONCLUSIONS: Complete perforation to the bladder by IUDs is a rare adverse event. Regular follow-up is required after the placement of IUDs. The possibility of uterine perforation should be investigated if IUD users encounter persistent lower abdominal pain or urinary tract infection.

Intraperitoneally displaced intrauterine device.

Intra-abdominal displacement of an intrauterine device (IUD) is a rare but serious complication. This is a case report of a 44-year-old woman who was referred to a surgical department with intermittent abdominal pain. Gynaecological examination and ultrasound failed to identify the patient's IUD. An abdominal CT scan confirmed the diagnosis of the intra-abdominally migrated IUD and the device was extracted by laparoscopy. Surgical removal of the migrating IUD is recommended to prevent long-term complications such as intra-abdominal adhesions, organ perforation, and fistula formation.

[Endoscopic removal of intrauterine device perforating the sigmoid colon: case report]. / Retrait endoscopique d'un dispositif intra-utérin perforant le côlon sigmoïde: à propos d'un cas.

Intrauterine device (IUD) is the mainstay of family planning methods in developing countries. However, it is associated with severe complications such as bleeding, perforation and migration to adjacent organs. Although perforation of the uterus is not rare, migration to the sigmoid colon is exceptional. We here report a case of IUD migration into sigmoid colon; this was removed via low endoscopy. The study involved a 45-year-old woman using an IUD who presented with pelvic pain associated with a feeling of pelvic heaviness 6 years later of insertion. Clinical examination was without abnormalities, and computed tomography (CT) scan showed the IUD embedded in the sigmoid colon wall. Diagnostic and therapeutic laparoscopy was performed, which objectified IUD-related intestinal perforation. IUD was partially embedded in the sigmoid colon wall and couldn't be removed. The device was removed during colonoscopy by diathermy loop excision (15 mm in diameter).

Uterine perforation during intrauterine procedures and its management.

OBJECTIVE: Uterine perforation is a potential, not rare complication of all intrauterine procedures and may be associated with injury of surrounding organs and structures. The incidence, risk factors, possible prevention, dia-gnosis, management and impact on future reproduction is reviewed here. METHODS: Systematic review of available sources on the topic was carried out using the PubMed database and textbooks of Czech authors. CONCLUSION: Some risk factors that make access to the uterine cavity difficult may be prevented, however, others remain unpreventable. For patients in whom the perforation occurred during sondage, dilatation or insertion of blunt and cold instrument, without significant bleeding and who are hemodynamically stable, observation is recommended rather than immediate abdominal exploration. The exception are young women planning pregnancy in whom endoscopic suture is indicated. Abdominal exploration is required in patients who have been injured by electrosurgical or sharp device, laser, vacuum curette, who are hemodynamically unstable or show signs of severe bleeding or visceral injury.

Intrauterine devices migrated into the bladder: two case reports and literature review.

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine devices (IUD) are widely used all over the world. One of the most serious complications is uterine perforation, and it is very rare for the IUD to penetrate the bladder after perforation. Here we report two cases of IUD migration into the bladder, and review the literature to analyze the possible causes and solutions of such complications. CASE PRESENTATION: Case NO. 1 is a 37-year-old female who presented lower urinary tract symptoms for a year. Cystoscopy showed that a strip of metal penetrated into the bladder, and the surface was covered with stones. The patient underwent cystotomy and foreign body removal under general anesthesia. Case NO. 2 is a 46-year-old woman who previously inserted an IUD in 1998, but she had an unexpected pregnancy in 1999. Her doctor believed that "the IUD had spontaneously expulsed" and a new IUD was inserted after her pregnancy was terminated. Her CT scan showed an IUD on the left side of the bladder and another IUD in the uterus. Her foreign body was removed by cystotomy. CONCLUSION: Patients with IUD should be suggested to check the device regularly, and those who with a missed IUD have to rule out the possibility of IUD migration. For patients with IUD combined with lower urinary tract symptoms, it is necessary to be aware of whether IUD perforation affects the bladder.

Transvaginal strangulated bowel evisceration through uterine perforation due to unsafe abortion: a case report and literature review.

BACKGROUND: Induced abortion, whether therapeutic or elective, is a surgical procedure frequently practiced worldwide. It is a significant cause of maternal morbidity and mortality. When the procedure is performed in precarious conditions, by unqualified personnel, it leads to serious consequences, including uterine perforation and its associated lesions. Its management remains a medico-surgical emergency. CASE PRESENTATION: We present two cases of unsafe abortions performed by cervical dilatation and intrauterine curettage which resulted in uterine perforation and intestinal evisceration through the vagina leading to acute intestinal obstruction. Both patients underwent intensive resuscitation followed by an emergency laparotomy. The first case was a 26-year-old woman living in rural Cameroon. Following a procedure of termination of her pregnancy, the patient noted the presence of bowel at the vaginal introitus associated with signs of intestinal obstruction. She was transferred to a specialized center was after 4 days later of the onset of the evisceration. Considering the gangrened eviscerated terminal ileum, a right hemicolectomy with anastomosis was performed, as well as a suture of the uterine perforation. The second patient was an 18-year-old African living as a refugee in Cameroon. She was referred for abdominal pain in the context of intestinal obstruction with a viable jejunal loop extruding through the vagina. A simple jejunal resection was performed with end-to-end anastomosis and suture of the uterine perforation. In both cases, the postoperative course was uneventful. CONCLUSIONS: Uterine perforation is a serious complication of intrauterine gynecological procedures and instrumental abortion in particular. It can lead to evisceration of the intra-abdominal viscera through the uterine perforation. It is therefore a real surgical emergency with multiple and fatal consequences.

Dislocated intrauterine devices: clinical presentations, diagnosis and management.

OBJECTIVE: Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are globally one of the most popular methods of contraception. Uterine perforation is one of the most significant complications of IUD use and commonly occurs at the time of IUD insertion rather than presenting as delayed migration. This paper reports a series of 13 cases of displaced IUDs requiring retrieval by laparoscopy or laparotomy. All the IUDs were copper bearing and most perforations occurred immediately after IUD insertion. CASES: In two patients with sigmoid colon injury and IUD penetration of the appendix, laparoscopic management had failed and laparotomy was necessary owing to severe obliteration of the pelvic cavity. In one patient laparotomy was the preferred surgical approach owing to acute bowel perforation. In the remaining patients, the displaced devices were successfully removed by laparoscopy. CONCLUSION: Uterine perforation and IUD migration to the organs in the abdominopelvic cavity are serious complications of IUD insertion and can be successfully managed by laparoscopy, or by laparotomy in the presence of severe pelvic adhesions or unexpected complications.

Rectal Perforation by an Intrauterine Device Leading to Fatal Intra-Abdominal Sepsis and Necrotizing Fasciitis.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal injury from an intrauterine device (IUD) is rare but may lead to major complications. CASE: A 55-year-old woman presented to a tertiary care hospital with 4 days of generalized weakness, confusion, dysuria, and lower back pain. She provided a vague history of an unsuccessful attempt to remove an IUD 30 years prior. A computed tomography scan demonstrated an IUD in the rectal lumen, with gluteal and pelvic gas and fluid collections. Emergency surgery found necrotizing fasciitis. Despite multiple debridements, sigmoidoscopic IUD removal, and long-term intravenous antibiotics, the patient died from sepsis and multiorgan failure. CONCLUSION: IUDs require proper monitoring and timely removal to prevent potential complications associated with organ perforation.

Hysteroscopic management of omentum incarceration secondary to uterine perforation: Case report and review of literature.

Uterine perforation is a potential complication of intrauterine procedures that can be associated with vascular or visceral injury. We report the case of a 35-year-old woman diagnosed with omentum incarceration, secondary to a uterine perforation, during a dilatation and curettage. This rare complication was successfully managed by release of incarcerated omentum hysteroscopically. Sealing of uterine wall defect was achieved by administration of intravenous uterotonic drugs, thus, avoiding a major surgery. In conclusion, this is a novel approach to a case of uterine omental incarceration. To date, there are few cases reported in the literature and only one of them was managed by hysteroscopy. Hysteroscopy alone or combined hysteroscopic and laparoscopic approach when needed, should be attempted in such cases as it is safe and minimally invasive.

Generalized peritonitis secondary to spontaneously perforated pyometra in elderly women:two cases with different clinical courses and surgical approaches and review of the literature.

We describe two cases of spontaneously perforated pyometra (SPP) in elderly women treated with two different surgical approaches. An 88-year-old woman underwent emergency laparotomy for presumed diagnosis of gastrointestinal (GI) tract perforation. During surgery, SPP and a tumor of the sigmoid colon were identified. Total hysterectomy and sigmoid colon resection were performed. Despite exhaustive postoperative treatments, the patient died on postoperative day (POD) 189 due to peritonitis and pneumonia. A 93-year-old woman with acute abdomen was diagnosed with severe pyometra and primarily treated with transcervical drainage. Due to progression of generalized peritonitis, laparoscopic surgery was performed. Intraoperatively, scar from a uterine body perforation was identified, leading to the diagnosis of SPP. Only peritoneal irrigation and drainage were performed, in consideration of her advanced age. She improved and was discharged from the hospital on POD 35. The prognosis for SPP is sometimes poor, especially in older women. Minimally invasive surgical intervention might be considered for primary treatment in such cases.

Inadvertent Perforation of a Gravid Uterus During Laparoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery is safe in pregnancy, but is not without risk. Inadvertent uterine perforation of the gravid uterus is a rare complication. CASES: Three pregnant women had inadvertent uterine perforation during laparoscopic surgery. All patients were counseled regarding the risks of an "incidental fetoscopy" and elected to continue the pregnancy. Two delivered after preterm premature rupture of membranes at 32 and 36 weeks' gestation, and one twin pregnancy delivered at 30 weeks due to preeclampsia. CONCLUSION: Surgical planning of the gravid patient undergoing laparoscopic surgery should include demarcation of the most superior aspect of the uterine fundus, either via physical examination or, if not conclusive, via preoperative or intraoperative ultrasound.

Emergent Laparoscopic Removal of a Perforating Intrauterine Device During Pregnancy Under Regional Anesthesia.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To describe and demonstrate a technique for laparoscopic removal of a perforating intrauterine device (IUD) during pregnancy, and to provide tips to facilitate safe laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy. DESIGN: Video presentation of the technique for laparoscopic removal of a perforating IUD in a pregnant woman. SETTING: Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences, and Dentistry, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy. INTERVENTION: A 30-year-old woman, gravida 3, para 2, with a copper T IUD (Nova T 380; Bayer, Leverkusen, Germany) perforating the left adnexa presented to the emergency room complaining of left lower quadrant pain. The patient had the IUD inserted by her gynecologist 3 months before the onset of the symptoms. Ultrasound revealed a 6-week intrauterine pregnancy with the presence of fetal cardiac activity along with the IUD perforating the left adnexa. The patient returned at 11 weeks of gestation complaining of worsening abdominal pain and excruciating left lower quadrant pain. She was scheduled for laparoscopic excision of the perforating IUD [1-3]. Considering her pregnancy, laparoscopy under regional anesthesia was performed in the minimal Trendelenburg position at 12 degrees, through open laparoscopic access [4]. Intra-abdominal pressure of 8 mmHg and ultrasound energy to cut and coagulate, avoiding monopolar/bipolar energy owing to the presence of a copper IUD, were used. The IUD and tube were extracted in an endobag through umbilical access, under a 5-mm, 0-degree telescope in left lateral access [5]. The procedure was carried out uneventfully, and the IUD was removed. Fetal viability was confirmed after the procedure. At the time of this report, the patient was in the 23rd week of gestation, and the pregnancy was progressing without any problems. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic removal of perforated IUD during pregnancy under regional anesthesia is a feasible and safe option that should be considered when needed.

Specific small bowel injuries due to prolapse through vaginal introitus after transvaginal instrumental gravid uterus perforation: a review.

A small bowel prolapse through the vaginal introitus after a transvaginal instrumental gravid uterus perforation is a surgical emergency. To define the mechanisms of an irreversible, small bowel ischaemia due to small bowel prolapse through a vaginal introitus, ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, PubMed Central, and Google Scholar were searched. Out of the 81 articles screened, 28 cases of a small bowel evisceration through vaginal introitus were included. A small bowel obstruction severity grading was defined with risk factors; potential mechanisms of different severity grades after a transvaginal instrumental gravid uterine perforation with a vaginal evisceration. The duration of symptoms or a delay in the diagnosis did not change the incidence of the two most severe grades-mesenteric stripping and a small bowel degloving. Both obstruction types develop immediately during an instrumental abortion. The severity of obstruction does not influence the maternal outcome.