Can hysterosalpingocontrast-sonography replace hysterosalpingography in the assessment of tubal subfertility?

• Published in: European journal of radiology 2000-07, Vol.35 (1), p.44-48
• Main Authors: Dijkman, Antonius B, Mol, Ben W.J, van der Veen, Fulco, Bossuyt, P.M.M, Hogerzeil, Hendricus V
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Biological and medical sciences; Diagnosis; Evaluation Studies as Topic; Fallopian Tube Diseases - diagnosis; Fallopian Tube Diseases - diagnostic imaging; Fallopian Tubes - diagnostic imaging; Female; Genital system. Mammary gland; HSG; Humans; HyCoSy; Hysterosalpingography - methods; Infertility, Female - diagnosis; Infertility, Female - diagnostic imaging; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects); Laparoscopy; Medical sciences; Obstetrics; Prospective Studies; Random Allocation; Tubal pathology; Ultrasonic imaging; Ultrasonic investigative techniques; Ultrasonography
• ISSN: 0720-048X; 1872-7727
• DOI: 10.1016/S0720-048X(99)00127-8

Introduction: Hysterosalpingo-contrastsonography (HyCoSy) is a new method for assessing tubal patency using transvaginal ultrasound. It is thought to have several advantages over conventional hysterosalpingography (HSG). We prospectively evaluated the performance of HyCoSy and HSG in the diagnosis of tubal pathology. Methods and patients: One-hundred consecutive subfertile women underwent both HyCoSy and HSG in randomised order. Results of both tests were related to findings at laparoscopy with dye, which was used as the reference test. Each woman was asked to score the pain exsperienced at both procedures on a visual analogue scale. Results: When laparoscopy with dye was used as reference test, the likelihood ratios of HyCoSy were slightly inferior to those obtained for HSG. Since the performance of HyCoSy was dependent on experience, the results were recalculated omitting the 50 initial procedures from the analysis. In that calculation, results of HyCoSy and HSG were comparable. There were no differences in pain experienced during the procedure, as there appeared also to be no differences in patient preferences. Conclusion: There appear to be no strong arguments either to replace HSG by HyCoSy, or to reject the use of HyCoSy. Both procedures can be used in the evaluation of tubal pathology.