This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Maj Michael L. Richardson, MC
USAF USAF Hospital Mather AFB, Calif

JAMA. 1982;248(14):1710.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

David Zakin, MD, and colleagues described the clinical and radiological workup of perforated and embedded intrauterine devices (IUDs) in a recent issue of THE JOURNAL (1982;247:2144). They stated that the procedure of choice for demonstrating uterine perforation by an IUD is hysterosalpingography (HSG).

I agree that in some cases HSG may be the only definitive way to demonstrate a partial perforation. However, computed tomography (CT) is also capable of identifying uterine perforation by an IUD. Two colleagues and I¹ recently reported such a case. The patient was positioned in the scanner by means of a digital scout view of the pelvis. The accuracy of this method of positioning allowed us to definitely diagnose a perforation after a single CT "slice." Not only is CT a speedier examination than HSG, but it is also less invasive, more comfortable to the patient, and delivers a lower gonadal radiation . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?