International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2010
A 10-year experience in removing Chinese intrauterine devices.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cheung Vincent Y T
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To review 10 years of experience in removal of Chinese intrauterine devices (IUD) attained by a single gynecologist practicing in Canada.
METHODS: Office records from women who presented requesting IUD removal between January 1999 and December 2008 were reviewed. Specific data including the time of IUD insertion, the country where the IUD was inserted, menstrual and obstetric histories, success of the IUD removal in an office setting, and the type of IUD removed were recorded.
RESULTS: Of 314 women using a Chinese IUD, 227 (72.3%) had successful removal of the device in an office setting. Most women (86.6%) fitted with a Chinese IUD had no thread seen outside the cervix. A total of 279 Chinese IUDs were removed (from both the office setting and operating room), consisting of 11 different types; the most common type was the stainless steel ring (63.4%). Difficult removal was associated with absence of a visible thread outside the cervix, postmenopausal status, and no previous vaginal birth. The type of IUD and duration of placement did not affect the ease of removal.
CONCLUSION: Knowledge about the different types of Chinese IUDs in use will enable gynecologists to provide optimal care to their patients.
METHODS: Office records from women who presented requesting IUD removal between January 1999 and December 2008 were reviewed. Specific data including the time of IUD insertion, the country where the IUD was inserted, menstrual and obstetric histories, success of the IUD removal in an office setting, and the type of IUD removed were recorded.
RESULTS: Of 314 women using a Chinese IUD, 227 (72.3%) had successful removal of the device in an office setting. Most women (86.6%) fitted with a Chinese IUD had no thread seen outside the cervix. A total of 279 Chinese IUDs were removed (from both the office setting and operating room), consisting of 11 different types; the most common type was the stainless steel ring (63.4%). Difficult removal was associated with absence of a visible thread outside the cervix, postmenopausal status, and no previous vaginal birth. The type of IUD and duration of placement did not affect the ease of removal.
CONCLUSION: Knowledge about the different types of Chinese IUDs in use will enable gynecologists to provide optimal care to their patients.