OBJECTIVE: To compare the characteristics of six different catheters for performing sonohysterography (SHG) to identify those that offer the best compromise between reliability, tolerability, and cost. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: University hospital. PATIENT(S): Six hundred ten women undergoing SHG. INTERVENTION(S): We performed SHG with six different types of catheters: Foleycath (Wembley Rubber Products, Sepang, Malaysia), Hysca Hysterosalpingography Catheter (GTA International Medical Devices S.A., La Caleta D.N., Dominican Republic), H/S Catheter Set (Ackrad Laboratories, Cranford, NJ), PBN Balloon Hystero-Salpingography Catheter (PBN Medicals, Stenloese, Denmark), ZUI-2.0 Catheter (Zinnanti Uterine Injection; BEI Medical System International, Gembloux, Belgium), and Goldstein Catheter (Cook, Spencer, IN). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We assessed the reliability, the physician's ease of use, the time requested for the insertion of the catheter, the volume of contrast medium used, the tolerability for the patients, and the cost of the catheters. RESULT(S): In 568 (93%) correctly performed procedures, no statistically significant differences were found among the catheters. The Foleycath was the most difficult for the physician to use and required significantly more time to position correctly. The Goldstein catheter was the best tolerated by the patients. The Foleycath was the cheapest whereas the PBN Balloon was the most expensive. CONCLUSION(S): The choice of the catheter must be targeted to achieving a good balance between tolerability for the patients, efficacy, cost, and the personal preference of the operator.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the characteristics of six different catheters for performing sonohysterography (SHG) to identify those that offer the best compromise between reliability, tolerability, and cost. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: University hospital. PATIENT(S): Six hundred ten women undergoing SHG. INTERVENTION(S): We performed SHG with six different types of catheters: Foleycath (Wembley Rubber Products, Sepang, Malaysia), Hysca Hysterosalpingography Catheter (GTA International Medical Devices S.A., La Caleta D.N., Dominican Republic), H/S Catheter Set (Ackrad Laboratories, Cranford, NJ), PBN Balloon Hystero-Salpingography Catheter (PBN Medicals, Stenloese, Denmark), ZUI-2.0 Catheter (Zinnanti Uterine Injection; BEI Medical System International, Gembloux, Belgium), and Goldstein Catheter (Cook, Spencer, IN). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We assessed the reliability, the physician's ease of use, the time requested for the insertion of the catheter, the volume of contrast medium used, the tolerability for the patients, and the cost of the catheters. RESULT(S): In 568 (93%) correctly performed procedures, no statistically significant differences were found among the catheters. The Foleycath was the most difficult for the physician to use and required significantly more time to position correctly. The Goldstein catheter was the best tolerated by the patients. The Foleycath was the cheapest whereas the PBN Balloon was the most expensive. CONCLUSION(S): The choice of the catheter must be targeted to achieving a good balance between tolerability for the patients, efficacy, cost, and the personal preference of the operator.