子宫内节育器移位至上腹部网膜1例罕见病例报道
A Rare Case Report of an Intrauterine Device That Has Shifted into the Upper Abdominal Omentum
DOI: 10.12677/acm.2025.1572110, PDF, HTML, XML,   
作者: 刘红梅, 王 芳, 向 腾*:永顺县人民医院妇科,湖南 永顺;米晓东:湘西土家族苗族自治州人民医院妇科,湖南 吉首
关键词: 子宫内节育器移位腹腔镜子宫穿孔IUD Displacement Laparoscopy Uterine Perforation
摘要: 宫内节育器(IUD)是一种常用的长效可逆避孕方式,但长期留置可能引发严重并发症。本文报告一例75岁女性因反复上腹痛入院,经CT检查发现肝脏前方有环形金属异物,结合病史推测为移位的节育器。患者于48年前置入IUD,之后未取出。在腹腔镜手术中,于右上腹部大网膜中发现节育器并成功摘除。术后恢复顺利,无明显不适。该病例提示,节育器可发生远距离移位且可能长期无明显症状,易被误诊漏诊。影像学检查在明确诊断中具有重要价值,腹腔镜是安全有效的治疗手段。临床应加强节育器随访管理,特别是对高龄及长期留置患者,及早发现并处理潜在并发症。
Abstract: The intrauterine device (IUD) is a commonly used long-acting reversible contraceptive method, but prolonged retention can lead to serious complications. This report presents a case of a 75-year-old woman admitted for recurrent upper abdominal pain. CT imaging revealed a ring-shaped metallic foreign body anterior to the liver, which, combined with her medical history, was suspected to be a displaced IUD. The patient recalled an IUD insertion 48 years ago, which had never been removed. During laparoscopic surgery, the IUD was found encapsulated in the greater omentum of the right upper abdomen and was successfully extracted. Postoperative recovery was uneventful. This case highlights that IUDs can migrate long distances and remain asymptomatic for extended periods, increasing the risk of misdiagnosis. Imaging plays a crucial role in diagnosis, and laparoscopy is a safe and effective treatment option. Regular follow-up is essential, especially in elderly patients or those with long-term IUD retention, to detect and manage potential complications early.
文章引用:刘红梅, 王芳, 米晓东, 向腾. 子宫内节育器移位至上腹部网膜1例罕见病例报道[J]. 临床医学进展, 2025, 15(7): 1186-1191. https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2025.1572110

1. 引言

IUD避孕作为一种避孕手段,具备可逆性、高效性、安全性以及便捷性等显著优势。然而,其潜在并发症亦不容忽视,主要包括节育器自然脱落、异常出血、感染风险、移位以及子宫穿孔等[1]。IUD不在子宫腔内正常位置时称为节育器异位,包括子宫内移位、子宫外移位。子宫内移位最常见的表现形式为IUD部分移位至宫颈部位,其轴线发生扭曲,甚至植入子宫肌层,部分或全部穿透子宫浆膜或从宫颈外口突出[2]。子宫外移位的最多位于子宫直肠陷凹,其次为大网膜、腹腔、膀胱、膀胱腹膜反折、盆腔、阔韧带、肠管、卵巢[3]。大部分节育器移位在盆腔或下腹部,移位到上腹部的报道罕见。本文报道一例IUD移位至上腹部网膜内的患者,详细病例介绍如下。

2. 病例资料

患者女,75岁,因“反复上腹部疼痛10余年,再发5天”于2025年04月03日在我院消化内科住院治疗。患者既往有甲减病史10余年,长期口服优甲乐;高血压病史10余年,长期规律口服降压药。入院查体:全腹软,右上腹部稍压痛,无反跳痛,未扪及明显包块,肝、脾肋下未扪及,墨菲氏征阴性。肝区、双肾区无叩痛,移动性浊音阴性。入院后完善相关检查:行肝胆胰脾 + 双肾、输尿管膀胱彩超检查提示:脂肪肝,请结合生化检查;双肾点状强回声,考虑:小结石;胃镜提示:1) 幽门管息肉;2) 慢性浅表性胃炎;3) 胃底部粘膜微隆起性改变,性质待定,粘膜下不排?4) 慢性浅表性胃炎。肠镜提示:1) 乙状结肠息肉(已行冷切除术);2) 慢性结直肠炎;3) 内痔。入院后行护胃、解痉止痛等对症支持治疗后未见明显好转,遂行胸部 + 腹部CT检查提示:1) 双肺多发小结节,LU-RADS 2-3S类,建议年度复查;2) 肝脏前部环形异物(如图1图2),结合患者考虑病史,考虑为移位节育环。邀请妇科会诊,再次询问生育史得知。患者适龄结婚后自然分娩两次后,于48年前宫内置入节育环,未取环,置环术后5年再次妊娠分娩3次,未见节育环流出,自认为节育环自行脱落。于35年前行双侧输卵管结扎术,术后未再次妊娠。术前诊断为:腹痛查因:节育器移位?为明确节育环位置,术前行腹部立位平片检查:右侧结肠肝曲环形金属影,考虑节育器移位(如图3)。

Figure 1. CT examination, horizontal section, high density shadow on the right liver surface is the IUD

1. CT检查,水平切面,右侧肝脏表面高密度影为节育器

Figure 2. Three-dimensional CT imaging, where the arrow marks the IUD

2. CT三维成像,箭头标注处为节育器

Figure 3. Preoperative chest and abdomen plain film, with IUD marked by arrow

3. 术前胸腹部平片,箭头标注处为节育器

患者于2025年04月09日在全身麻醉下行腹腔镜探查术,术中探查下腹部见子宫萎小,前位,表面光滑,未见明显缺损。双侧卵巢萎小,外观未见异常,双侧输卵管外观未见异常。探查上腹部见肝脏正常大小,表面光滑,与周围组织无粘连,未见节育环,探视右侧结肠肝区网膜聚集,切开网膜表面,内可见一圆形金属节育环被网膜包裹(如图4),电凝切断周围粘连网膜,完整取出节育环。手术顺利,术后复查腹部立位平片。术后1月随访患者,患者无腹痛等不适。

Figure 4. Intraoperative picture showing the displacement of the IUD to the upper abdominal omentum, which is densely encapsulated by the omentum

4. 术中图片,可见节育器移位至上腹部网膜,被网膜致密包裹

3. 讨论

IUD至1909年问世以来,已经逐渐发展为世界上最受欢迎的避孕方式之一[4]。子宫节育器的形态由之前的圆圈型逐步发展出了T型、V型、三角形、条形等。为达到更好的避孕效果,大部分IUD含有铜、或者其他金属。近年来,随着医学研究与实践的不断进步,IUD的应用范围已显著超过了传统的避孕功能,目前已被应用在子宫腺肌病、异常子宫出血、子宫内膜息肉,也可被作为早期子宫内膜癌的辅助治疗[5] [6]。这些功效逐步推动IUD在全球范围内的使用率逐步攀升,随着IUD的使用率不断增加,使用时间不断延长,其带来的并发症也逐渐增多,常见的并发症包括了慢性盆腔疼痛、经量增多、经量减少、和节育器移位[7]。节育器移位发生率较低,约10%使用节育器的女性发生节育器移位[8]

IUD异位至子宫外的途径主要包括两种情况:其一为IUD穿透子宫壁进入盆腔或腹腔,此为较为常见的情形;其二为IUD经输卵管移位至盆腹腔,该情况极为罕见[9]。发生子宫穿孔导致节育器宫外移位的时机有两种情况,首先是在插入装置时发生完全性的穿孔,并且将IUD放到浆膜之外。第二种是节育器在宫内放置位置正确,但随后节育器发生透壁移位而导致子宫穿孔[10]。在插入装置时发生子宫穿孔的危险因素有母乳喂养、产后闭经、产后<6个月和医务人员缺乏经验等[11] [12]。IUD在宫腔内放置时间过长,尤其是在绝境后,随着子宫的逐渐萎缩,或者产后放置节育器时节育器部分嵌顿在子宫基层,随着子宫大小逐渐恢复正常,发生节育器移位的风险增大[9] [13]。另外有研究发现不同种类、不同形状的节育器的发生移位的概率不同,金属制的节育器和T型节育器的发生移位的概率较高[14]。该患者出现IUD移位至上腹部网膜可能是由于患者在放置IUD时发生子宫穿孔,并将IUD放置在子宫肌层,或者部分位于子宫肌层,部分位于子宫浆膜外,故该IUD未能起到避孕的效果。患者妊娠后,IUD随着子宫的增大至上腹部,分娩时剧烈的子宫收缩,将IUD自子宫肌层排出,与上腹部网膜粘连。至此完成IUD移位至上腹部的过程。

大部分患者子宫节育器移位发生在放置IUD时[11],通常无症状,或在手术后几天内出现轻微下腹部疼痛不适或少量的阴道流血[15]。对于有症状的患者,出现的症状通常与子宫节育器移位的位置相关,包括阴道出血、腹胀、腹痛或下尿路综合征(尿频、尿急、排尿困难和血尿) [16]。Zhilong Chen报道了一例出现尿频、尿痛的患者,经膀胱镜检查诊断为IUD移位至膀胱粘膜病并导致膀胱结石形成[17]。Liyi Zhang 报道了一例复发出现腹痛腹泻的患者,结肠镜检查诊断为结肠炎,抗炎治疗好转后再发腹痛腹泻,经腹腔镜探查确诊为IUD移位引起的回肠穿孔[18]。对于怀疑子宫节育器移位的患者,可考虑选择性超声、腹部平片、腹部盆腔CT检查、盆腔MRI来明确诊断[18] [19]。超声检查便捷、价廉、无创,一般可作为初筛的首要选择,但超声无法显示整个IUD的形状,且受体位影响,对非含铜的IUD分辨率低,容易出现漏诊[9]。在临床上,如果超声检查没有发现节育器,则可选择对骨盆和腹部进行X光检查。腹部平片可以找到节育器大致的位置,尤其是对于金属的节育器更为清晰,还可以排除是否合并肠穿孔[18]。CT扫描不仅可以识别正确放置的IUD并评估其完整性,还可以评估任何潜在的并发症,包括IUD穿孔后错位、嵌入、穿孔、粘连、梗阻、脓肿和腹部其他结构的受累[20]。还可以对CT检查结果进行3D重建,可以精确直观地显示IUD的形态和位置,以及IUD与骨盆之间的解剖关系,更清楚地判断穿孔的程度以及有无肠穿孔[21] [22]。使用磁共振评估IUD并不常见;然而,MRI可用于定位节育器并确定其与子宫的关系。已经对含铜节育器女性在临床MRI和CT扫描中的影响进行了系统评价。结果表明,MRI检查对使用铜IUD的女性是安全的[23]。该患者因上腹部疼痛不适在消化内科住院治疗,为明确疼痛的原因,遂行胸部 + 腹部CT检查,发现上腹部异常金属影,对CT进行3D重建,诊断为IUD移位。

定期妇科检查对于检测IUD位置和检测潜在并发症至关重要,建议在节育器置入后6~12周进行随访,然后每两年进行随访一次[19]。一旦通过影像学诊断出移位的节育器,不论患者有无症状,建议行手术取出,因为移位节育器有导致肠道或膀胱穿孔、肠梗阻和慢性盆腔疼痛以及复杂性盆腔脓肿的风险[24]-[26]。手术方式可选腹腔镜、宫腔镜、膀胱镜、肠镜、剖腹探查等,也可以是多种手术方式的联合,具体采取的手术方式需要根据影像学确定移位节育器的位置来决定[1] [16] [18] [19] [27]

由于IUD在妇科被越来越广泛的应用,IUD移位的发生率逐渐增加。定期随诊是非常有必要的,在随诊中一旦发现IUD移位,应及时行相应的手术方式取出节育器,以减少相关并发症发生的风险。

声 明

该病例报道已获得病人的知情同意。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Li, Q., Qi, D., Bi, T., Guo, X. and Chen, H. (2024) Case Report: Uterine Perforation Caused by Migration of Intrauterine Devices. Frontiers in Medicine, 11, Article ID: 1455207.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2024.1455207
[2] Gunardi, E.R., Suastika, A.V., Nuzullita, M., Fadila, N.F., Anjani, G.P. and Pingkan, T. (2022) The Lost Intrauterine Levonorgestrel-Releasing System in Women with Adenomyosis: A Case Report. SAGE Open Medical Case Reports, 10, 1-6.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2050313x221135725
[3] 李亚冬, 程雷. 宫内节育器异位临床分析[J]. 临床误诊误治, 2014(8): 58-60.
[4] 蒋维荣, 俞永江. 宫内节育器移位至腹壁1例报告[J]. 腹腔镜外科杂志, 2021, 26(9): 719-720.
[5] Wei, H., Pan, N., Zhang, W., Xiong, G., Guo, W., Dong, Z., et al. (2023) Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System-Based Therapies for Early-Stage Endometrial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Gynecologic Oncology, 34, e36.
https://doi.org/10.3802/jgo.2023.34.e36
[6] Creinin, M.D., Barnhart, K.T., Gawron, L.M., Eisenberg, D., Mabey, R.G. and Jensen, J.T. (2023) Heavy Menstrual Bleeding Treatment with a Levonorgestrel 52-mg Intrauterine Device. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 141, 971-978.
https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000005137
[7] Fadiloglu, S., Dilbaz, B., Fadiloglu, E. and Dilbaz, S. (2018) Relationship between Copper IUD Complications and Ultrasonographic Findings. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 297, 989-996.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-018-4711-y
[8] Segall-Gutierrez, P., Natavio, M., Basu, T. and Atrio, J. (2012) Malpositioned Intrauterine Contraceptive Devices: Risk Factors, Outcomes, and Future Pregnancies. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 119, 869-870.
https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0b013e31824d9249
[9] 李智敏, 李燕珍, 茹敏滴, 等. 宫内节育器异位临床分析[J]. 中华妇产科杂志, 2023, 58(6): 456-459.
[10] Ferguson, C.A., Costescu, D., Jamieson, M.A. and Jong, L. (2016) Transmural Migration and Perforation of a Levonorgestrel Intrauterine System: A Case Report and Review of the Literature. Contraception, 93, 81-86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2015.08.019
[11] Heinemann, K., Reed, S., Moehner, S. and Do Minh, T. (2015) Risk of Uterine Perforation with Levonorgestrel-Releasing and Copper Intrauterine Devices in the European Active Surveillance Study on Intrauterine Devices. Contraception, 91, 274-279.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2015.01.007
[12] Kaislasuo, J., Suhonen, S., Gissler, M., Lahteenmaki, P. and Heikinheimo, O. (2012) Intrauterine Contraception: Incidence and Factors Associated with Uterine Perforation—A Population-Based Study. Human Reproduction, 27, 2658-2663.
https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/des246
[13] 冯桂梅, 肖丽, 黄薇, 等. 宫腔镜下子宫中隔切除术后放置宫内节育器及应用激素补充治疗对术后妊娠结局的影响[J]. 实用妇产科杂志, 2013, 29(10): 769-772.
[14] 申素琪, 李瑛. 90例宫内节育器异位不良事件报告分析[J]. 中国计划生育学杂志, 2010, 18(2): 111-113.
[15] Tabatabaei, F. and Masoumzadeh, M. (2021) Dislocated Intrauterine Devices: Clinical Presentations, Diagnosis and Management. The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care, 26, 160-166.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13625187.2021.1874337
[16] Hoang, V.T., Le, N.N.T., Hoang, T.H. and Chansomphou, V. (2024) Intrauterine Device (IUD) Embedded in Bladder Wall with Calculus Formation Treated with Cystoscopy: A Case Report. Oxford Medical Case Reports, 2024, omae073.
https://doi.org/10.1093/omcr/omae073
[17] Chen, Z., Lv, Z. and Shi, Y. (2024) A Case Report of Intrauterine Device Migration: Uterine Penetration and Bladder Involvement with Secondary Stones 3 Years Post-Insertion. International Journal of Womens Health, 16, 1903-1907.
https://doi.org/10.2147/ijwh.s492865
[18] Zhang, L., Lai, Y., Shen, H. and Zeng, W. (2024) Ileal Perforation Caused by Intrauterine Device Displacement. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 231, 469-470.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2024.05.018
[19] Hassine, H.B., Chaouch, M.A., Jallali, M., Jabra, S.B., Abdelalli, M., Korbi, I., et al. (2024) Gastrointestinal Perforation Caused by Displaced Contraceptive Device: A Case Report. The Pan African Medical Journal, 49, Article No. 13.
https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2024.49.13.44432
[20] Zhu, G.G., Ludwig, D.R., Rogers, D.M., Olpin, J.D., Barker, E., Freeman, E.A., et al. (2023) CT Imaging of Intrauterine Devices (IUD): Expected Findings, Unexpected Findings, and Complications. Abdominal Radiology, 49, 237-248.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-023-04052-3
[21] Wu, X., Wang, J., Zhao, C., Sun, X., Shi, Y., Zhang, Z., et al. (2015) Printed Three-Dimensional Anatomic Templates for Virtual Preoperative Planning before Reconstruction of Old Pelvic Injuries: Initial Results. Chinese Medical Journal, 128, 477-482.
https://doi.org/10.4103/0366-6999.151088
[22] Ertopcu, K., Nayki, C., Ulug, P., Nayki, U., Gultekin, E., Donmez, A., et al. (2014) Surgical Removal of Intra‐Abdominal Intrauterine Devices at One Center in a 20‐Year Period. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 128, 10-13.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2014.07.025
[23] Neumann, W., Uhrig, T., Malzacher, M., Kossmann, V., Schad, L.R. and Zoellner, F.G. (2018) Risk Assessment of Copper-Containing Contraceptives: The Impact for Women with Implanted Intrauterine Devices during Clinical MRI and CT Examinations. European Radiology, 29, 2812-2820.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5864-6
[24] (1987) Mechanism of Action, Safety and Efficacy of Intrauterine Devices. Report of a WHO Scientific Group. World Health Organization Technical Report Series, 753, 1-91.
[25] Gill, R.S., Mok, D., Hudson, M., Shi, X., Birch, D.W. and Karmali, S. (2012) Laparoscopic Removal of an Intra-Abdominal Intrauterine Device: Case and Systematic Review. Contraception, 85, 15-18.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2011.04.015
[26] Ozgun, M.T., Batukan, C., Serin, I.S., Ozcelik, B., Basbug, M. and Dolanbay, M. (2007) Surgical Management of Intra-Abdominal Mislocated Intrauterine Devices. Contraception, 75, 96-100.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2006.09.011
[27] Ye, L., Zhu, Y. and Zhu, F. (2024) Colonoscopic Removal of an Intrauterine Device with Rectal Perforation: A Case Report. Medicine, 103, e38872.
https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000038872