Diagnostic accuracy of hysterosalpingography compared with hysteroscopy and laparoscopy for female infertility

Main Article Content

Chalida Aphinives
Siriluksana Siriwirot
Punthip Thammaroj
Lingling Salang

Abstract

Background and Objective: The main anatomical cause of female infertility is congenital or acquired abnormalities. Hysterosalpingography (HSG) is a non-invasive procedure commonly used for the initial evaluation of the fallopian tubes and uterine cavity, especially for female infertility.  This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of HSG in infertile women by comparing the findings of intrauterine abnormality with hysteroscopy and patency of fallopian tubes with diagnostic laparoscopy.


Methods: A retrospective study from January 2018 to December 2020, among 515 women who underwent HSG, 26 patients had performed hysteroscopy and 19 patients had undergone laparoscopy for infertility.


Results: The sensitivity and specificity of HSG to detect abnormal tubal patency were 89% and 70%, hydrosalpinx (either unilateral or bilateral) were 100% and 70%, intrauterine abnormality were 74% and 43%.  However, the diagnostic accuracy of HSG to detect cervical abnormality was rather poor with the sensitivity and specificity of 0% and 56%.


Conclusion: In addition to HSG, laparoscopy, hysteroscopy, or other investigations should be performed for every female infertility case to confirm intrauterine and cervical findings which might be missed or overestimated by HSG.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
1.
Aphinives C, Siriwirot S, Thammaroj P, Salang L. Diagnostic accuracy of hysterosalpingography compared with hysteroscopy and laparoscopy for female infertility. SRIMEDJ [Internet]. 2022 Feb. 28 [cited 2023 Feb. 7];37(1):23-7. Available from: https://li01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/SRIMEDJ/article/view/253308
Section
Original Articles

References

1. Zegers-hochschild F, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, Ishihara O, Mansour R, Nygren K, et al. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology, 2009. Fertil Steril. 2009 ;92:1520-4.
2. Mascarenhas MN, Flaxman SR, Boerma T, Vanderpoel S, Stevens GA. National, regional, and global trends in infertility prevalence since 1990: A systematic analysis of 277 health surveys. PLoS Med. 2019 ;9:e1001356. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001356
3. Mauricio SA, Ludovico M, Riccardo M. Anatomical causes of female infertility and their management. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2013 ;12352:518-24.
4. Chalazonitis A, Tzovara I, Laspas F, Porfyridis P, Ptohis N, Tsimitselis G. Hysterosalpingography: technique and applications. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2009 ;38:199-205.
5. Eng CW, Tang PH, Ong CL. Hysterosalpingography: current applications. Singapore Med J. 2007 ;48:368-73.
6. CDC.gov [Internet]. USA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; c2021 [cited 2021 Jan 27]. https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/infertility/index.htm
7. Simpson WL Jr, Beitia LG, Mester J. Hysterosalpingography: a reemerging study. Radiographics. 2006 ;26:419-31.
8. Bassil A, Rubod C, Borghesi Y, Kerbage Y. Schreiber ES, Azais H, et al. Operative and diagnostic hysteroscopy: A novel learning model combining new animal models and virtual reality simulation. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017 ;211:42-7.
9. Watrelot A, Nisolle M, Chelli H, Hocke C, Rongières C, Racinet C, International Group for Fertiloscopy Evaluation. Is laparoscopy still the gold standard in infertility assessment? A comparison of fertiloscopy versus laparoscopy in infertility. Results of an international multicentre prospective trial: the ‘FLY’ (Fertiloscopy-Laparoscopy) study. Hum Reprod. 2003 ;18:834–9.
10. Rizvi SM, Ajaz S, Gulshan, Nikita, Anjum S, Inara. Comparison of hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy in diagnosis of tubal occlusion. Annal Int Med Dental Res. 2016 ;2:165-8.
11. Gharekhanloo F, Rastegar F. Comparison of hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy in evaluation of female infertility. Med Res Arch. 2017 ;5:1-12.
12. Zafarani F, Ahmadi F, Shahrzad G. Hysterosalpingographic features of cervical abnormalities: acquired structural anomalies. British J Radiol. 2015 ;88:20150045.
13. Soares SR, Barbosa dos Reis MM, Camargos AF. Diagnostic accuracy of sonohysterography, transvaginal sonography, and hysterosalpingography in patients with uterine cavity diseases. Fertil Steril 2000 ;73:406–11.