These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of hysterosalpingography and hysteroscopy in female infertility.
    Author: Wang CW, Lee CL, Lai YM, Tsai CC, Chang MY, Soong YK.
    Journal: J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc; 1996 Aug; 3(4):581-4. PubMed ID: 9050692.
    Abstract:
    STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic value of hysterosalpingography (HSG) and diagnostic hysteroscopy in infertility evaluations. DESIGN: Comparative 2-year study. SETTING: Outpatient infertility clinic of a tertiary medical center. PATIENTS: Two hundred sixteen women being investigated for infertility. INTERVENTIONS: An HSG was followed by a diagnostic hysteroscopy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The HSGs were interpreted as normal in 79 (36.9%) women and as showing some abnormalities of the uterine cavity in 135 (63.1%). In the former group, 51 patients had a normal uterine cavity, but 28 had abnormal findings on hysteroscopy, a false negative rate of 35.4%. Of 135 women with an abnormal HSG, hysteroscopy found a normal uterine cavity in 21, a false positive rate of 15.6%. The sensitivity of HSG was 80.3% in revealing intrauterine abnormality and its specificity was 70.1%. Although some abnormalities were identified by both methods in 114 women, findings of both procedures were similar in only 88 (77.2%). In 75 (35.0%), the findings of HSG differed from those of hysteroscopy. In only 139 (65%) patients were the findings (normal and abnormal) similar for both methods. CONCLUSIONS: We advocate hysteroscopy in the investigation of female infertility for its accuracy, safety, simplicity, and convenience.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]