Risk of Malposition in a 56-Year-Old Female Lippes Loop IUD User: A Case Report
Abstract
Introduction: The intrauterine device (IUD) stands as a widely utilized contraceptive modality globally, renowned for its effectiveness and long-term reliability. However, within the spectrum of potential complications, the occurrence of perforation, though rare, represents a significant concern due to its potential for serious sequelae. Perforation entails the unintended penetration of the uterine wall by the IUD, leading to its migration beyond the uterine cavity. Despite its gravity, perforation often presents as an asymptomatic phenomenon, with some cases remaining undetected for extended durations following insertion. Lippes loop IUD complications are relatively low risk like malposition, embedded, or perforation.
Case Report: This study documents a notable case involving a 56-year-old, P1A0, who had been utilizing an intrauterine device for a remarkable 31-year period. Referred from Hermina Arcamanik Hospital, the patient sought intervention for IUD removal, notwithstanding the absence of associated symptoms. Notably, physical examination and laboratory analyses yielded unremarkable findings, highlighting the latent nature of this complication. Further diagnostic elucidation through ultrasound examination confirmed the presence of a Lippes Loop (LL) IUD embedded within the uterine cavity. The intrauterine device (IUD) became embedded, rendering it impossible to remove. The IUD extraction is performed using hysteroscopy. Subsequent peri hysteroscopic extraction of the IUD unveiled partial embedding within the posterior uterine cavity, necessitating precise intervention to mitigate potential complications. Fortunately, postoperative surveillance revealed an absence of pain or hemorrhagic complications, culminating in the patient’s discharge on the first postoperative day.
Conclusion: Constituted primarily of plastic material, LL IUDs offer prolonged utility devoid of significant adverse sequelae, underscoring their role as a viable contraceptive option with a slight risk of embedded for women seeking enduring contraception.
Risiko Malposisi pada Akseptor Lippes Loop IUD pada Wanita Usia 56 Tahun: Sebuah Laporan Kasus
Abstrak
Pendahuluan: Alat Kontrasepsi Dalam Rahim (AKDR) merupakan metode kontrasepsi yang banyak digunakan di seluruh dunia karena efektivitas dan keandalannya dalam jangka panjang. Namun, di antara berbagai potensi komplikasi, perforasi menjadi salah satu kekhawatiran utama meskipun jarang terjadi, mengingat potensi dampak serius yang dapat ditimbulkannya. Perforasi terjadi ketika IUD secara tidak sengaja menembus dinding rahim, menyebabkan migrasi IUD keluar dari kavitas uterus. Meskipun serius, komplikasi ini sering ersifat asimtomatik dan tidak terdeteksi dalam jangka waktu lama setelah pemasangan. Komplikasi IUD tipe lippes loop dapat terjadi seperti malposisi, embedded atau perforasi, tetapi pada kasus yang jarang.
Presentasi Kasus: Studi ini melaporkan kasus menarik pada seorang wanita berusia 56 tahun, P1A0, yang telah menggunakan IUD selama 31 tahun. Pasien dirujuk dari RS Hermina Arcamanik untuk menjalani prosedur pengangkatan IUD, meskipun tidak mengalami gejala terkait. Pemeriksaan fisik dan analisis laboratorium tidak menunjukkan kelainan, menekankan sifat laten komplikasi ini. Pemeriksaan ultrasonografi lebih lanjut mengonfirmasi keberadaan IUD jenis Lippes Loop (LL) yang tertanam di dalam kavitas rahim. Prosedur histeroskopi dilakukan karena IUD tertanam di dalam kavitas rahim sehingga membuat IUD sulit untuk diekstraksi secara normal. Saat prosedur histeroskopi, ditemukan bahwa sebagian IUD tertanam di dinding posterior rahim, memerlukan intervensi presisi guna mencegah komplikasi lebih lanjut. Pemantauan pascaoperasi tidak menunjukkan adanya nyeri atau komplikasi perdarahan, dan pasien dipulangkan pada hari pertama setelah operasi.
Kesimpulan: Karena terbuat dari bahan dasar plastik, IUD LL menawarkan masa pemakaian yang lama tanpa menimbulkan efek samping yang signifikan, menjadikannya pilihan kontrasepsi yang andal, namun dengan risiko kecil terjadi embedded bagi wanita yang mencari solusi kontrasepsi jangka panjang.
Kata kunci: Alat kontrasepsi dalam rahim, embedded, lippes loop, risiko
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Gunbey HP, Sayit AT, Idilman IS, Aksoy O. Migration of intrauterine devices with radiological findings: report on two cases. BMJ Case Rep. 2014;2014.
Obstetricians ACo, Gynecologists. Long-acting reversible contraception: implants and intrauterine devices. Practice Bulletin No. 121. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(1):184-96.
Istanbulluoglu MO, Ozcimen EE, Ozturk B, Uckuyu A, Cicek T, Gonen M. Bladder perforation related to intrauterine device. J Chin Med Assoc. 2008;71(4):207-9.
Connolly CT, Fox NS. Incidence and Risk Factors for a Malpositioned Intrauterine Device Detected on Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Within Eight Weeks of Placement. J Ultrasound Med. 2022;41(6):1525-36.
Braaten KP, Benson CB, Maurer R, Goldberg AB. Malpositioned intrauterine contraceptive devices: risk factors, outcomes, and future pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(5):1014-20.
Rowlands S, Oloto E, Horwell DH. Intrauterine devices and risk of uterine perforation: current perspectives. Open Access J Contracept. 2016;7:19-32.
Kaislasuo J, Suhonen S, Gissler M, Lähteenmäki P, Heikinheimo O. Uterine perforation caused by intrauterine devices: clinical course and treatment. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(6):1546-51.
Pollock M. Letting intrauterine devices lie. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1982;285(6339):395-6.
Sinha M, Rani R, Gupta R, Chand K, Kaur G. Lippes Loop Inserted 45 Years Back: The Dilemma to Remove It or Leave It in situ. A Case Report with Review of Literature. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015;9(4):Qe01-5.
Goldstuck ND, Wildemeersch D. Role of uterine forces in intrauterine device embedment, perforation, and expulsion. Int J Womens Health. 2014;6:735-44.
Wildemeersch D, Hasskamp T, Goldstuck N. Malposition and displacement of intrauterine devices–diagnosis, management and prevention. Clin Obstet Gynecol Reprod Med. 2016;2(3):183-8.
Moschos E, Twickler DM. Does the type of intrauterine device affect conspicuity on 2D and 3D ultrasound? American journal of roentgenology. 2011;196(6):1439-43.
Jiang J, Bian S, Li S, Wang S. Risk factors for intrauterine device embedment in postmenopausal women: an analysis of 731 participants undergoing hysteroscopy. Menopause. 2023;30(7):717-22.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24198/obgynia.v8i1.766
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
_CROSREF22.jpg)









