Referral Center Experience With Nonpalpable Contraceptive Implant Removals

Melissa C. Matulich, Melissa J. Chen, Natasha R. Schimmoeller, Jennifer K. Hsia, Suji Uhm, Machelle D. Wilson, Mitchell D. Creinin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe our experience with office removal of nonpalpable contraceptive implants at our referral center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study by reviewing the charts of patients referred to our family planning specialty center for nonpalpable or complex contraceptive implant removal from January 2015 through December 2018. We localized nonpalpable implants using high-frequency ultrasonography and skin mapping in radiology, followed by attempted removal in the office using local anesthesia and a modified vasectomy clamp. We abstracted information on demographics, implant location, and outcomes. RESULTS: Of 61 referrals, 55 patients attended their scheduled appointments. Seven patients had palpable implants; six elected removal. The other 48 patients had ultrasound localization, which identified 47 (98%) of the implants; the remaining patient had successful localization with computed tomography imaging. Nonpalpable implants were suprafascial (n=22), subfascial (n=25) and intrafascial (n=1); four of these patients opted to delay removal. Of 50 attempted office removals, all palpable (n=6), all nonpalpable suprafascial (n=21 [100%, 95% CI 83-100%]), and 19 out of 23 (83%, 95% CI 67-98%) subfascial implants were successful. Three of the four patients with failed subfascial implant office removal had successful operating room removal with a collaborative orthopedic surgeon; the other patient sought removal elsewhere. Transient postprocedure neuropathic complaints were noted in 7 out of 23 (30%, 95% CI 12-49%) subfascial and 1 out of 21 (5%, 95% CI 0-13%) suprafascial removals (P=.048). Nonpalpable implants were more likely to be subfascial in nonobese patients (24/34, 71%) as compared with obese (1/13, 8%) patients (P<.001). Seven (28%) of the 25 subfascially located implants had been inserted during a removal-reinsertion procedure through the same incision. CONCLUSION: Most nonpalpable contraceptive implants can be removed in the office by an experienced subspecialty health care provider after ultrasound localization. Some patients may experience transient postprocedure neuropathic pain. Nonpalpable implants in thinner women are more likely to be in a subfascial location.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)801-806
Number of pages6
JournalObstetrics and gynecology
Volume134
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2019

Fingerprint

Contraceptive Agents
Referral and Consultation
Vasectomy
Neuralgia
Local Anesthesia
Operating Rooms
Ambulatory Care Facilities
Radiology
Health Personnel
Ultrasonography
Appointments and Schedules
Cohort Studies
Retrospective Studies
Tomography
Demography
Skin

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Referral Center Experience With Nonpalpable Contraceptive Implant Removals. / Matulich, Melissa C.; Chen, Melissa J.; Schimmoeller, Natasha R.; Hsia, Jennifer K.; Uhm, Suji; Wilson, Machelle D.; Creinin, Mitchell D.

In: Obstetrics and gynecology, Vol. 134, No. 4, 01.10.2019, p. 801-806.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Matulich, Melissa C. ; Chen, Melissa J. ; Schimmoeller, Natasha R. ; Hsia, Jennifer K. ; Uhm, Suji ; Wilson, Machelle D. ; Creinin, Mitchell D. / Referral Center Experience With Nonpalpable Contraceptive Implant Removals. In: Obstetrics and gynecology. 2019 ; Vol. 134, No. 4. pp. 801-806.
@article{c34f39f880aa4a3a90be2fadaf84c4b9,
title = "Referral Center Experience With Nonpalpable Contraceptive Implant Removals",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To describe our experience with office removal of nonpalpable contraceptive implants at our referral center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study by reviewing the charts of patients referred to our family planning specialty center for nonpalpable or complex contraceptive implant removal from January 2015 through December 2018. We localized nonpalpable implants using high-frequency ultrasonography and skin mapping in radiology, followed by attempted removal in the office using local anesthesia and a modified vasectomy clamp. We abstracted information on demographics, implant location, and outcomes. RESULTS: Of 61 referrals, 55 patients attended their scheduled appointments. Seven patients had palpable implants; six elected removal. The other 48 patients had ultrasound localization, which identified 47 (98{\%}) of the implants; the remaining patient had successful localization with computed tomography imaging. Nonpalpable implants were suprafascial (n=22), subfascial (n=25) and intrafascial (n=1); four of these patients opted to delay removal. Of 50 attempted office removals, all palpable (n=6), all nonpalpable suprafascial (n=21 [100{\%}, 95{\%} CI 83-100{\%}]), and 19 out of 23 (83{\%}, 95{\%} CI 67-98{\%}) subfascial implants were successful. Three of the four patients with failed subfascial implant office removal had successful operating room removal with a collaborative orthopedic surgeon; the other patient sought removal elsewhere. Transient postprocedure neuropathic complaints were noted in 7 out of 23 (30{\%}, 95{\%} CI 12-49{\%}) subfascial and 1 out of 21 (5{\%}, 95{\%} CI 0-13{\%}) suprafascial removals (P=.048). Nonpalpable implants were more likely to be subfascial in nonobese patients (24/34, 71{\%}) as compared with obese (1/13, 8{\%}) patients (P<.001). Seven (28{\%}) of the 25 subfascially located implants had been inserted during a removal-reinsertion procedure through the same incision. CONCLUSION: Most nonpalpable contraceptive implants can be removed in the office by an experienced subspecialty health care provider after ultrasound localization. Some patients may experience transient postprocedure neuropathic pain. Nonpalpable implants in thinner women are more likely to be in a subfascial location.",
author = "Matulich, {Melissa C.} and Chen, {Melissa J.} and Schimmoeller, {Natasha R.} and Hsia, {Jennifer K.} and Suji Uhm and Wilson, {Machelle D.} and Creinin, {Mitchell D.}",
year = "2019",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/AOG.0000000000003457",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "134",
pages = "801--806",
journal = "Obstetrics and Gynecology",
issn = "0029-7844",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Referral Center Experience With Nonpalpable Contraceptive Implant Removals

AU - Matulich, Melissa C.

AU - Chen, Melissa J.

AU - Schimmoeller, Natasha R.

AU - Hsia, Jennifer K.

AU - Uhm, Suji

AU - Wilson, Machelle D.

AU - Creinin, Mitchell D.

PY - 2019/10/1

Y1 - 2019/10/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To describe our experience with office removal of nonpalpable contraceptive implants at our referral center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study by reviewing the charts of patients referred to our family planning specialty center for nonpalpable or complex contraceptive implant removal from January 2015 through December 2018. We localized nonpalpable implants using high-frequency ultrasonography and skin mapping in radiology, followed by attempted removal in the office using local anesthesia and a modified vasectomy clamp. We abstracted information on demographics, implant location, and outcomes. RESULTS: Of 61 referrals, 55 patients attended their scheduled appointments. Seven patients had palpable implants; six elected removal. The other 48 patients had ultrasound localization, which identified 47 (98%) of the implants; the remaining patient had successful localization with computed tomography imaging. Nonpalpable implants were suprafascial (n=22), subfascial (n=25) and intrafascial (n=1); four of these patients opted to delay removal. Of 50 attempted office removals, all palpable (n=6), all nonpalpable suprafascial (n=21 [100%, 95% CI 83-100%]), and 19 out of 23 (83%, 95% CI 67-98%) subfascial implants were successful. Three of the four patients with failed subfascial implant office removal had successful operating room removal with a collaborative orthopedic surgeon; the other patient sought removal elsewhere. Transient postprocedure neuropathic complaints were noted in 7 out of 23 (30%, 95% CI 12-49%) subfascial and 1 out of 21 (5%, 95% CI 0-13%) suprafascial removals (P=.048). Nonpalpable implants were more likely to be subfascial in nonobese patients (24/34, 71%) as compared with obese (1/13, 8%) patients (P<.001). Seven (28%) of the 25 subfascially located implants had been inserted during a removal-reinsertion procedure through the same incision. CONCLUSION: Most nonpalpable contraceptive implants can be removed in the office by an experienced subspecialty health care provider after ultrasound localization. Some patients may experience transient postprocedure neuropathic pain. Nonpalpable implants in thinner women are more likely to be in a subfascial location.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To describe our experience with office removal of nonpalpable contraceptive implants at our referral center. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study by reviewing the charts of patients referred to our family planning specialty center for nonpalpable or complex contraceptive implant removal from January 2015 through December 2018. We localized nonpalpable implants using high-frequency ultrasonography and skin mapping in radiology, followed by attempted removal in the office using local anesthesia and a modified vasectomy clamp. We abstracted information on demographics, implant location, and outcomes. RESULTS: Of 61 referrals, 55 patients attended their scheduled appointments. Seven patients had palpable implants; six elected removal. The other 48 patients had ultrasound localization, which identified 47 (98%) of the implants; the remaining patient had successful localization with computed tomography imaging. Nonpalpable implants were suprafascial (n=22), subfascial (n=25) and intrafascial (n=1); four of these patients opted to delay removal. Of 50 attempted office removals, all palpable (n=6), all nonpalpable suprafascial (n=21 [100%, 95% CI 83-100%]), and 19 out of 23 (83%, 95% CI 67-98%) subfascial implants were successful. Three of the four patients with failed subfascial implant office removal had successful operating room removal with a collaborative orthopedic surgeon; the other patient sought removal elsewhere. Transient postprocedure neuropathic complaints were noted in 7 out of 23 (30%, 95% CI 12-49%) subfascial and 1 out of 21 (5%, 95% CI 0-13%) suprafascial removals (P=.048). Nonpalpable implants were more likely to be subfascial in nonobese patients (24/34, 71%) as compared with obese (1/13, 8%) patients (P<.001). Seven (28%) of the 25 subfascially located implants had been inserted during a removal-reinsertion procedure through the same incision. CONCLUSION: Most nonpalpable contraceptive implants can be removed in the office by an experienced subspecialty health care provider after ultrasound localization. Some patients may experience transient postprocedure neuropathic pain. Nonpalpable implants in thinner women are more likely to be in a subfascial location.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85072790674&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85072790674&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003457

DO - 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003457

M3 - Article

C2 - 31503148

AN - SCOPUS:85072790674

VL - 134

SP - 801

EP - 806

JO - Obstetrics and Gynecology

JF - Obstetrics and Gynecology

SN - 0029-7844

IS - 4

ER -