Intussusception and Incarceration of a Fallopian Tube: Report of 2 Atypical Cases, with Differential Considerations, Clinical Evaluation, and Current Management Strategies

Abstract Herein are presented 2 cases from the last 5 years. In case 1, a fallopian tube intussusception without perforation, misdiagnosed as a myoma, was observed at hysteroscopy of the uterine cavity18 months after last vacuum aspiration. In case 2, a fallopian tube incarceration, misdiagnosed as...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of minimally invasive gynecology Vol. 18; no. 2; pp. 246 - 249
Main Authors: Damiani, Gianluca Raffaello, MD, Tartagni, Massimo, MD, Crescini, Claudio, MD, Persiani, Paolo, MD, Loverro, Giuseppe, MD, Von Wunster, Silvia, MD
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01-03-2011
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Herein are presented 2 cases from the last 5 years. In case 1, a fallopian tube intussusception without perforation, misdiagnosed as a myoma, was observed at hysteroscopy of the uterine cavity18 months after last vacuum aspiration. In case 2, a fallopian tube incarceration, misdiagnosed as a placental polyp, was observed 3 months after last suction curettage. Although uterine perforation caused by suction curettage after abortion or of afterbirth occurs rarely, it is a complication that must be taken into account because after this procedure there may be painful symptoms such as the typical triad of abdominal pain, vaginal discharge, and dyspareunia. In some situations, as in case 2, amenorrhea occurs alone, without other distressing symptoms. In both cases, a hysteroscopic approach was used; laparoscopy was necessary only in case 2.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Case Study-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-4
content type line 23
ObjectType-Report-1
ObjectType-Article-3
ISSN:1553-4650
1553-4669
DOI:10.1016/j.jmig.2010.10.009