Is an intrauterine device a contraindication for uterine artery embolization? A study of 20 patients
other
OA: closed
public-domain-us
AI-generated summary
A retrospective study of 20 patients found no infectious complications after uterine artery embolization in women with intrauterine devices, suggesting it may not be a contraindication.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
The presence of an intrauterine device (IUD) has been traditionally considered a risk factor for postprocedural infection in patients undergoing uterine artery embolization (UAE). The authors retrospectively evaluated the occurrence of infectious complications following embolization in 20 women with IUDs. After a mean follow-up of 20.5 months, none of the patients developed an infectious complication. One patient required hysterectomy following embolization for persistent pain. Pathologic evaluation of the hysterectomy specimen demonstrated ischemia without evidence of inflammation. This experience suggests that the presence of an IUD might not be considered a contraindication for UAE.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Condition tags
MeSH descriptors
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.
Source provenance
- europepmc
- last seen: 2026-06-13T06:22:48.782012+00:00
- pubmed
- last seen: 2026-05-13T22:13:53.633898+00:00
- unpaywall
- last seen: 2026-05-14T19:30:52.867331+00:00
License: public-domain-us
· commercial use OK
· attribution required
Courtesy of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Courtesy of the U.S. National Library of Medicine