{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,12]],"date-time":"2026-03-12T11:51:55Z","timestamp":1773316315390,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":22,"publisher":"Elsevier BV","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2015,7,1]],"date-time":"2015-07-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1435708800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.elsevier.com\/tdm\/userlicense\/1.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["contraceptionjournal.org","clinicalkey.jp","clinicalkey.com","clinicalkey.es","clinicalkey.com.au","clinicalkey.fr","elsevier.com","sciencedirect.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Contraception"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2015,7]]},"DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2015,2,21]],"date-time":"2015-02-21T02:21:08Z","timestamp":1424485268000},"page":"77-80","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/elsevier_cm_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":17,"title":["Safe and cost-effective ultrasound guided removal of retained intrauterine device: our experience"],"prefix":"10.1016","volume":"92","author":[{"given":"Usha","family":"Verma","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Fausto E.","family":"Astudillo-D\u00e1valos","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Sabrina A.","family":"Gerkowicz","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"78","reference":[{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0005","article-title":"Contraceptive methods women have ever used: United States, 1982\u20132010. Division of vital statistics","volume":"62","author":"Daniels","year":"2013","journal-title":"Natl Health Stat Rep"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0010","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"291","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2010.09.004","article-title":"Renewed interest in intrauterine contraception in the United States: evidence and explanation","volume":"83","author":"Hubacher","year":"2011","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0015","article-title":"Current contraceptive Use in the United States, 2006\u20132010, and changes in patterns of use since 1995. Division of vital statistics","volume":"60","author":"Jones","year":"2012","journal-title":"Natl Health Stat Rep"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0020","author":"Guttmacher.org"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0025","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"102","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2010.07.004","article-title":"In-office retrieval of intrauterine contraceptive devices with missing strings","volume":"8","author":"Prabhakaran","year":"2011","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0030","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"555","DOI":"10.1016\/0010-7824(88)90002-9","article-title":"A comparative study of the ease of removal of intrauterine contraceptive devices","volume":"37","author":"Roke","year":"1988","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0035","first-page":"40","article-title":"Intrauterine devices: insertion and removal: practical procedures","volume":"11","author":"Waldron","year":"1982","journal-title":"Aust Fam Physician"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0040","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"915","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.1992.tb14442.x","article-title":"Randomized comparative study in 217 women of three disposable plastic IUD thread retrievers","volume":"99","author":"Bounds","year":"1992","journal-title":"Br J Obstet Gynaecol"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0045","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"149","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2004.08.015","article-title":"The duration of use causes of discontinuation, and problems during removal in women admitted for removal of IUD","volume":"71","author":"Tugrul","year":"2005","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0050","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"354","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2012.01.018","article-title":"Management of missing strings in users of intrauterine contraceptives","volume":"86","author":"Marchi","year":"2012","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0055","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"785","DOI":"10.1016\/0029-7844(96)00009-9","article-title":"A new procedure for removal of a \u201clost\u201d intrauterine device","volume":"87","author":"Ben-Rafael","year":"1996","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0060","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"288","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2014.04.007","article-title":"Removal of the LNG IUD when strings are not visible: a case series","volume":"90","author":"Sweson","year":"2014","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0070","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"354","DOI":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2010.04.152","article-title":"Operative management of intrauterine device complications: a case series report","volume":"82","author":"Turok","year":"2010","journal-title":"Contraception"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0075","series-title":"ACOG Committee Opinion Number 450","article-title":"Increasing Use of contraceptive implants and intrauterine devices to reduce unintended pregnancy","year":"2009"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0080","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"128","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1204724","article-title":"Levonorgestrel intrauterine system versus medical therapy for menorrhagia","volume":"368","author":"Gupta","year":"2013","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0085","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"386","DOI":"10.1111\/ajo.12103","article-title":"The effectiveness and safety of ultrasound-guided removal of a Mirena(\u00ae) intrauterine system when the strings are not visible and conventional office procedures have failed","volume":"53","author":"Mizia","year":"2013","journal-title":"Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0090","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1019","DOI":"10.1007\/s00404-010-1374-8","article-title":"Diagnosis and management of intra-abdominal, mislocated intrauterine devices","volume":"281","author":"Balci","year":"2010","journal-title":"Arch Gynecol Obstet"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0095","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"110","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.6421","article-title":"Three dimensional ultrasound detection of abnormally located intrauterine contraceptive devices which are a source of pelvic pain and abnormal bleeding","volume":"34","author":"Benacerraf","year":"2009","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0100","first-page":"18","article-title":"Diagnosis and management of lost intrauterine contraceptive device","volume":"52","author":"Elahi","year":"2002","journal-title":"J Pak Med Assoc"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0105","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"521","DOI":"10.2214\/ajr.139.3.521","article-title":"Continuous sonographic monitoring of IUD extraction during pregnancy: preliminary report","volume":"139","author":"Shalev","year":"1982","journal-title":"AJR Am J Roentgenol"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0110","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"505","DOI":"10.1002\/jcu.1870120809","article-title":"Ultrasonically controlled removal of an intrauterine contraceptive device","volume":"12","author":"Ylostalo","year":"1984","journal-title":"J Clin Ultrasound"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008_bb0115","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"68","DOI":"10.1002\/jcu.1870140117","article-title":"Ultrasonic monitoring under local anesthesia during removal of an embedded intrauterine contraceptive device","volume":"14","author":"Reuter","year":"1986","journal-title":"J Clin Ultrasound"}],"container-title":["Contraception"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.elsevier.com\/content\/article\/PII:S001078241500075X?httpAccept=text\/xml","content-type":"text\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/api.elsevier.com\/content\/article\/PII:S001078241500075X?httpAccept=text\/plain","content-type":"text\/plain","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2018,9,25]],"date-time":"2018-09-25T00:25:31Z","timestamp":1537835131000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/linkinghub.elsevier.com\/retrieve\/pii\/S001078241500075X"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2015,7]]},"references-count":22,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2015,7]]}},"alternative-id":["S001078241500075X"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008","relation":{},"ISSN":["0010-7824"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0010-7824","type":"print"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2015,7]]},"assertion":[{"value":"Elsevier","name":"publisher","label":"This article is maintained by"},{"value":"Safe and cost-effective ultrasound guided removal of retained intrauterine device: our experience","name":"articletitle","label":"Article Title"},{"value":"Contraception","name":"journaltitle","label":"Journal Title"},{"value":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.contraception.2015.02.008","name":"articlelink","label":"CrossRef DOI link to publisher maintained version"},{"value":"article","name":"content_type","label":"Content Type"},{"value":"Copyright \u00a9 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.","name":"copyright","label":"Copyright"}]}}