Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Women's Health 1/2014

Open Access 01-12-2014 | Case report

Lippes Loop intrauterine device left in the uterus for 50 years: case report

Authors: Rosita Aniulienė, Povilas Aniulis

Published in: BMC Women's Health | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The first Lippes Loop intrauterine device (IUD) was introduced in 1962. It was a plastic double “S” loop, a trapezoid shaped IUD that closely fit around the contours of the uterine cavity, reducing the incidence of expulsion. This IUD was commonly used from the 1960’s to the 1980’s. Some authors state that the IUD can be left in the uterine cavity for an indefinite amount of time. Prolonged use of this device was common, however, it was associated with some complications like uterine bleeding during post-menopausal period and inflammatory pelvic diseases.

Case presentation

The patient was a 74-years-old woman who was admitted to a university hospital due to urinary incontinence stress. The patient’s history included 2 deliveries and 20 years of menopause. During ultrasonography a normally sized and shaped uterus was found. The uterine cavity was expanded by 14 mm with some fluid. A “Lippes” loop was also seen in the uterine cavity. Both ovaries were atrophic without any abnormalities. The patient had her IUD inserted 50 years ago. Patient underwent TOT (tension obturator tape ) surgery for urinary incontinence. Evacuation of IUD and uterine curettage was also done.

Conclusions

Fifty years of prolonged usage of LIPPES IUD had no influence on the woman’s health during our case.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Pisal N, Mammo M: Case-series report: management of post-menopausal bleeding in the presence of an intrauterine device. Contraception. 2002, 66 (5): 383-384. 10.1016/S0010-7824(02)00364-5.CrossRefPubMed Pisal N, Mammo M: Case-series report: management of post-menopausal bleeding in the presence of an intrauterine device. Contraception. 2002, 66 (5): 383-384. 10.1016/S0010-7824(02)00364-5.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Peipert J, Zhao Q, Allsworth J, Petrosky E, Madden T, Esienberg D, Secura G: Continuation and satisfaction of reversible contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2011, 117 (5): 1105-1113. 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821188ad.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Peipert J, Zhao Q, Allsworth J, Petrosky E, Madden T, Esienberg D, Secura G: Continuation and satisfaction of reversible contraception. Obstet Gynecol. 2011, 117 (5): 1105-1113. 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821188ad.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference The ESHRE Capri Workshop Group: Intrauterine devices and intrauterine systems. Hum Reprod Update. 2008, 14 (3): 197-208.CrossRef The ESHRE Capri Workshop Group: Intrauterine devices and intrauterine systems. Hum Reprod Update. 2008, 14 (3): 197-208.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Ding D, Hsu S, Chu T: Retained intrauterine device as an unusal cause of postmenopausal bleeding. Tzu Chi Med J. 2006, 18 (5): 389-391. Ding D, Hsu S, Chu T: Retained intrauterine device as an unusal cause of postmenopausal bleeding. Tzu Chi Med J. 2006, 18 (5): 389-391.
5.
go back to reference Wright EA, Aisien OA: Comparison of copper T-200 with Lippes Loop as a Contraceptive Device. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1989, 29 (2): 173-177. 10.1016/0020-7292(89)90849-7.CrossRefPubMed Wright EA, Aisien OA: Comparison of copper T-200 with Lippes Loop as a Contraceptive Device. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1989, 29 (2): 173-177. 10.1016/0020-7292(89)90849-7.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Phupong V, Sueblinvong T, Pruksananonda K, Taneepanichskul S, Triratanachat S: Uterine perforation with Lippes Loop Intrauterine Device-associated Actinomycosis: a case report and review of the literature. Contraception. 2000, 61 (5): 347-350. 10.1016/S0010-7824(00)00112-8.CrossRefPubMed Phupong V, Sueblinvong T, Pruksananonda K, Taneepanichskul S, Triratanachat S: Uterine perforation with Lippes Loop Intrauterine Device-associated Actinomycosis: a case report and review of the literature. Contraception. 2000, 61 (5): 347-350. 10.1016/S0010-7824(00)00112-8.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Pollock M: Letting uterine device lie. Br Med J. 1982, 285: 395-396. 10.1136/bmj.285.6339.395.CrossRef Pollock M: Letting uterine device lie. Br Med J. 1982, 285: 395-396. 10.1136/bmj.285.6339.395.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Lunca S, Bouras G, Romedea NS, Pertea M: Abdominal wall actinomycosis associated with prolonged use of an intrauterine device: a case report and review of the literature. Int Surg. 2005, 90 (4): 236-240.PubMed Lunca S, Bouras G, Romedea NS, Pertea M: Abdominal wall actinomycosis associated with prolonged use of an intrauterine device: a case report and review of the literature. Int Surg. 2005, 90 (4): 236-240.PubMed
9.
go back to reference Farley TM, Rosenberg MJ, Rowe PJ, Chen JH, Meirik O: Intrauterine devices and pelvic inflammatory disease: an international perspective. Lancet. 1992, 339 (8796): 785-788. 10.1016/0140-6736(92)91904-M.CrossRefPubMed Farley TM, Rosenberg MJ, Rowe PJ, Chen JH, Meirik O: Intrauterine devices and pelvic inflammatory disease: an international perspective. Lancet. 1992, 339 (8796): 785-788. 10.1016/0140-6736(92)91904-M.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Lippes Loop intrauterine device left in the uterus for 50 years: case report
Authors
Rosita Aniulienė
Povilas Aniulis
Publication date
01-12-2014
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Women's Health / Issue 1/2014
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6874
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-14-97

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

BMC Women's Health 1/2014 Go to the issue