Marín VK, Castillo-Quintana MP, Peña FLM, González MMA, Hernández FAA

Language: Spanish
References: 9
Page: 107-114
PDF size: 266.40 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background: The intrauterine device has been used for years as a contraceptive method; a non-frequent complication after its insertion is migration out of the uterus. The bladder location and the formation of vesicolithiasis are complications associated with migration.
Objective: To present a migration case from an intrauterine device to the bladder with overadded lithiasis as an unusual etiology of recurrent cystitis.
Case report: Clinical case of an intrauterine device in the bladder in a 43-year-old patient, whose diagnosis was made incidentally in a recurrent cystitis study, it was diagnosed by imaging and endoscopy in the Urology consultation; surgical treatment was decided by means of open cystolithotomy and a stone 4x5 cm in diameter was extracted. The patient evolved satisfactorily.
Conclusions: To consider the possibility of migration of the intrauterine device to the bladder with overadded lithiasis as a cause of recurrent cystitis in female patients who have a preceding use of this contraceptive method, thus it constitutes an important element in the diagnosis and treatment of urinary lower infection.

REFERENCES

1. Abonia CH, Gomez MC, Mosquera JE, Torregroza MA, Garcia D, Usubillaga F. Translocación de dispositivo intrauterino de cobre a vejiga y litiasis vesical secundaria–reporte de caso clínico. Revista Urología Colombiana [Internet]. 2020 [citado 10 Ene 2021];29(1):58-62. Disponible en: https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/pdf/10.1055/s-0039-1688465.pdf

2. Sano M, Nemoto K, Miura T, Suzuki Y. Endoscopic Treatment of Intrauterine Device Migration into the Bladder with Stone Formation. J Endourol Case Rep [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2020 Jan 15];3(1):105-107. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5628558/pdf/cren.2017.0038.pdf

3. Priyadarshi V, Sehgal N, Sen D. Ureteric erosion and obstruction: A rare but dreaded complication of intrauterine contraceptive device. Urol Ann [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2020 Jan 15];9(1):103-106. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5308026/

4. Torres JP, Fernandes V, Morais N, Anacleto S, Mota P, Lima E. Percutaneous or Transurethral Cystolithotomy for Bladder Lithiasis: Which is Safer? Acta Urológica Portuguesa [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2021 Jan 10];36(1-2):17-22. Available from: https://www.actaurologicaportuguesa.com/index.php/aup/article/view/115/50

5. Rodríguez Carballo M, Montero García JA, Sánchez Falcón A. Litiasis vesical secundaria a dispositivo intrauterino incrustado en pared vesical: Revisión de un caso clínico. Rev Med Electron [Internet]. 2009 [citado 15 Ene 2020];31(3). Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/pdf/rme/v31n3/spu10309.pdf

6. Gordon C, Tabetha H. Controversies in family planning: intrauterine device placement in solid organ transplant patients. Contraception [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2021 Jan 10];100(3):250-252. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010782419301751?via%3Dihub

7. Howard DL, Ceballos S, Volker KW. The Incidence of Mechanical Complicatios of Intrauterine Devices in the United States. JMIG [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2020 Jan 15];24(7Suppl). Available from: https://www.jmig.org/article/S1553-4650(17)31025-7/fulltext

8. Schlachterman A, Sharma A, Hilgenfeldt E. Lost and Found, a Case of IUD Migration. EC Gynaecology [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2021 Jan 10];8(3):109-111. Available from: https://www.ecronicon.com/ecgy/pdf/ECGY-08-00284.pdf

9. Dimitropoulos K, Skriapas K, Karvounis G, Tzortzis V. Intrauterine device migration to the urinary bladder causing sexual dysfunction: a case report. Hippokratia [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2020 Jan 15];20(1):70-72. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5074402/pdf/hippokratia-20-70.pdf