Introduction:Migration of intrauterine devices (IUDs) into the bladder is an uncommon complication; however, multiple cases have been documented in which the IUD perforates the uterine wall and migrates partially or completely into the bladder. This condition may cause chronic urinary symptoms, recurrent urinary tract infections, bladder stone formation, benign bladder hyperplasia, and even vesicouterine or rectovesical fistulas (1-6).The incidence of uterine perforation and migration associated with IUDs is estimated to range from 1.9 to 3.6 per 1,000 insertions; nevertheless, specifically intravesical migration is much rarer (3,4). Clinical presentation is usually nonspecific and includes dysuria, urinary urgency, pelvic pain, hematuria, or recurrent urinary tract infections. Diagnosis requires a high index of clinical suspicion and careful integration of gynecological history, particularly in patients with persistent urinary symptoms and history of IUD use, as migration may occur immediately after insertion or even several years later (1,2,4,7). Appropriate identification relies on imaging studies such as ultrasound, plain radiography, and computed tomography; however, definitive diagnostic confirmation is established by cystoscopy (4,5,7).Treatment depends on the location and degree of migration. Endoscopic removal via cystoscopy is considered the procedure of choice in most cases, although laparoscopic or open approaches may be required in complex situations (1-3,5,6).Intravesical migration of IUDs is well documented in the medical literature and should be suspected in patients with atypical urinary symptoms and absence of the device from the uterine cavity (1-7). The present case highlights the importance of considering bladder lithiasis secondary to IUD migration as a differential diagnosis in women with recurrent urinary tract infections and no evidence of the device in the uterus, as well as the effectiveness of open cystolithotomy, which in this case resolved the complication without adverse events.Case HistoryA 33 year old female patient from Calakmul, Campeche with a 12 year history of systemic arterial hypertension. Gynecologic and obstetric history included three pregnancies, one vaginal, and two cesarean sections secondary to preeclampsia.In 2012, the patient underwent her first cesarean section due to preeclampsia without complications. In 2016, a copper intrauterine device (IUD) was inserted, after which the patient developed symptoms consistent with recurrent urinary tract infections. In 2019, she became pregnant and delivery was completed by cesarean section, during which the IUD was not removed; during the same procedure, bilateral ligation was performed due to satisfied parity.Differential diagnosis, investigation and treatmentIn 2024, hysteroscopic removal of the IUD was attempted; however, the device could not be located. For this reason, a computed tomography scan was performed, revealing a T shaped structure with central hyperdense line measuring 3071 Hounsfield units and peripheral calcifications approximately 5 mm in size measuring 800 Hounsfield units, located in the right posterior bladder wall, with no apparent uterine or adnexal abnormalities (Figure 1).Based on these findings, the patient was referred to the Regional High-Speciality Hospital of the Yucatan Peninsula (IMSS-Bienestar) for confirmatory diagnosis and treatment. Diagnostic cystoscopy was performed, confirming the intravesical location of a calcified IUD. During the same procedure, an open cystolithotomy was performed, which proceeded without complications, allowing removal of a 5 cm bladder stone (Figure 2). Notably, cystoscopy revealed no scars, lesions, or fistulas that could explain migration of the IUD into the bladder, as presented in Figure 3.Conclusion and resultsPostoperative evolution was satisfactory. A complementary assessment by the Obstetrics and Gynecology Department demonstrated no evidence of reproductive organ damage associated with the intravesical migration of the intrauterine device. Given the complication related to prior IUD use, the patient received counseling regarding contraceptive history and future reproductive planning, confirming that no additional contraceptive intervention was required due to her previous bilateral tubal ligation. Ongoing multidisciplinary follow-up by Urology and Obstetrics and Gynecology was planned.From the patient’s perspective, she reported that she did not perceive the absence of the intrauterine device, as she had missed routine gynecological follow-up visits. She also indicated that urinary symptoms were common among female members of her family, which led her to consider her recurrent urinary complaints as normal and not indicative of increased severity. This perception contributed to a delay in seeking specialized care. After diagnosis and treatment, the patient reported an improved understanding of her condition and the importance of regular medical follow-up, even in the absence of alarming symptoms.DiscussionThe IUD is one of the most widely used contraceptive methods due to its multiple benefits and low incidence of adverse effects. Nevertheless, among its complications, the most serious is migrations to pelvic or abdominal organs, with the bladder being the least frequently affected site (8-10).Risk factors associated with IUD migration include immediate postpartum insertion, uterine structural abnormalities (such as uterine retroversion or scars secondary to previous sections), and the action of uterine contractions, which may promote displacement of the device from the uterine wall to adjacent organs (2). Although the exact mechanism of migration is not fully understood, two main hypotheses have been proposed: the first involves an acute traumatic perforation occurring immediately after insertion, and the second involves delayed inflammatory perforation resulting from progressive erosion and necrosis of the uterine wall, which may occur during the puerperium or even years after insertion (8,10).Once inside the bladder, the IUD acts as a nidus for crystallization and bladder stone formation by promoting the precipitation of mineral salts on its surface. This increases the risk of recurrent urinary tract infections and lower urinary tract symptoms, such as urinary frequency, dysuria, suprapubic pain, and hematuria (8). In the present case, the patient developed recurrent urinary tract infections, a finding consistent with reports in the literature; however, it has also been documented that some patients may remain asymptomatic for years (9,11).Although most migrated IUDs cause urinary tract infections and can be identified on plain radiography, complementary imaging studies are recommended for a more accurate evaluation. Among these, computed tomography is particularly useful prior to extraction, as it allows precise localization, assessment of device integrity, and detection of potential complications (4,7,12). In the reported case, both computed tomography and cystoscopy were essential for establishing the definitive diagnosis and planning the therapeutic approach, thereby minimizing the risk of complications.Management of migrated IUD remains controversial; however, removal is recommended as soon as possible in symptomatic patients, in accordance with the recommendations of the World Health Organization and the International Planned Parenthood Federations´s International Medical Advisory Panel (12). Although endoscopic cystolithotripsy is considered the treatment of choice due to its minimally invasive nature, therapeutic decision should be based on stone characteristics (size, hardness, number), location, presence of predisposing lesions, the patient’s clinical condition, and resource availability (8,9). In our case, the large size of the bladder stone justified an open cystolithotomy, which was performed without complications and followed by an adequate postoperative course.Although IUD migration is an uncommon complication after implantation, clinicians should be aware of this potential risk. A systematic review which included 165 cases of IUD perforation reported partial or complete bladder perforation in 39 cases, and cystoscopy was the removal technique in 23 of these patients. These findings highlight the importance of recognizing the bladder as a relevant site of IUD migration, and suggest that urinary tract symptoms should raise clinical suspicion in women with risk factors and history of IUD implantation (13).Considering the factors that may favor IUD displacement, it is essential to implement preventive measures to reduce placement failures, such as incorrect insertion or migration to adjacent organs. These include proper training of healthcare personnel, appropriate education regarding potential complications and the importance of periodic surveillance is also crucial, as IUD migration may present either early or several years after insertion. These strategies have been shown to improve the attitudes toward IUD provision and to achieve high rates of successful insertions with low complications rates in developed countries (14).Intravesical migration of an IUD, although rare, should be suspected in women with persistent urinary symptoms, recurrent urinary tract infections, and a history of IUD use, particularly when the device is not visualized within the uterine cavity. Timely diagnosis through imaging studies and cystoscopy is essential to prevent major complications. Treatment should be individualized according to the clinical and surgical characteristics of each case; in this context, both endoscopic removal and open cystolithotomy represent safe and effective alternatives.ReferencesChristodoulides AP, Karaolides T. Intravesical migration of an intrauterine device (IUD): case report. Urology. 2020;139:14–17. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2020.02.009.Varlas VN, Meianu AI, Rădoi AI, et al. Intrauterine contraceptive device migrated in the urinary tract: case report and extensive literature review. J Clin Med. 2024;13(14):4233. doi:10.3390/jcm13144233.Agil A, Tjahjodjati T, Atik N, Rachmadi D, Zahrina TT. Iatrogenic trauma of the bladder due to long-term unidentified intrauterine device malposition inside the bladder with rectovesical fistula: a case report. F1000Res. 2023;12:1390. doi:10.12688/f1000research.136351.2.Chai W, Zhang W, Jia G, Cui M, Cui L. Vesical transmigration of an intrauterine contraceptive device: a rare case report and literature review. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96(40):e8236. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000008236.Qu R, Yang L, Dai Y. Cystoscopy to remove an intrauterine contraceptive device embedded in the urinary bladder wall: a case report and literature review. J Int Med Res. 2021;49(5):3000605211015032. doi:10.1177/03000605211015032.Zhang P, Wang T, Yang L. Extensive intravesical benign hyperplasia induced by an extravesical migrated intrauterine device: a case report. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98(20):e15671. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000015671.Li Q, Qi D, Bi T, Guo X, Chen H. Uterine perforation caused by migration of intrauterine devices: a case report. Front Med (Lausanne). 2024;11:1455207. doi:10.3389/fmed.2024.1455207.Malki EG, Sbeih D, Bael P, Alsarabta H, Alzawahra A. The rolling stone: migration of an intrauterine device leading to bladder stone formation nine years after insertion: a case report. BMC Urol. 2025;25(1):93. doi:10.1186/s12894-025-01780-0.Chen Z, Lv Z, Shi Y. Intrauterine device migration with uterine penetration and bladder involvement complicated by secondary stones three years post-insertion: a case report. Int J Womens Health. 2024;16:1903–1907. doi:10.2147/IJWH.S492865.Tan JH, Lip H, Ong W, Omar S. Intrauterine contraceptive device embedded in bladder wall with calculus formation removed successfully with open surgery. Malays Fam Physician. 2019;14(2):29–31.Arshad Z, Saleem A, Zarak MS, Ahadi A, Umar Q, Afshan R. From contraception to calculus: an unusual case of intrauterine contraceptive device migration to the bladder nine years post-insertion. Cureus. 2024;16(4):e57582. doi:10.7759/cureus.57582.Verstraeten V, Vossaert K, Van den Bosch T. Migration of intrauterine devices. Open Access J Contracept. 2024;15:41–47. doi:10.2147/OAJC.S458156.Ouyang M, Peng K, Botfield JR, McGeechan K. Intrauterine contraceptive device training and outcomes for healthcare providers in developed countries: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2019;14(7):e0219746. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0219746.