Literature DB >> 16819615

Comparison of hysterosalpingography, hysterosonography and hysteroscopy in evaluation of the uterine cavity in patients with recurrent pregnancy losses.

Hélio Antonio Guimarães Filho1, Rosiane Mattar, Cláudio R Pires, Edward Araujo Júnior, Antonio F Moron, Luciano M M Nardozza.   

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the accuracy and acceptability of hysterosonography (HS) in the diagnosis of uterine anomalies in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss.
METHOD: Sixty non-pregnant patients with a history of at least three previous recurrent miscarriages were submitted to the HS, HSG and hysteroscopy (HTC) exams. The findings fall into three categories: synechiae, polypoid lesions and abnormal uterine cavity shape. The HTC exam was used as the gold standard. The findings of the HS and the HSG were compared to the HTC's and the agreement was evaluated using the Kappa coefficient. Significance was established at < 0.05. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were determined for each method. RESULT: Uterine anomalies were present in 38.3% (23) of the patients: 16 (26.7%) with synechiae, 3 (5.0%) with polypoid lesions and 8 (13.3%) with abnormal uterine cavity shape. Accuracy of the HS and the HSG was 90.9 and 85.2%. General sensitivity of the HS was superior to the HSG (90.5 vs. 75.0%). It also had a higher degree of agreement with the HTC (Kappa = 0.81 vs. 0.68). The HS caused significantly less pain than the other two methods.
CONCLUSIONS: The HS had higher diagnostic accuracy in the detection of uterine cavity anomalies and it was better tolerated by the patients when compared to hysterosalpingography and hysteroscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16819615     DOI: 10.1007/s00404-006-0186-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet        ISSN: 0932-0067            Impact factor:   2.344


  8 in total

1.  The efficacy, cost and patient satisfaction of classic versus office hysteroscopy in cases with suspected intrauterine space occupying lesions with 3-dimension ultrasound and abnormal uterine bleeding.

Authors:  Tarık Filiz; Emek Doğer; Aydın Corakçı; Semih Ozeren; Eray Calışkan
Journal:  J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc       Date:  2009-12-01

2.  The inSIGHT study: costs and effects of routine hysteroscopy prior to a first IVF treatment cycle. A randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Janine G Smit; Jenneke C Kasius; Marinus J C Eijkemans; Carolien A M Koks; Ron Van Golde; Jurjen G E Oosterhuis; Annemiek W Nap; Gabrielle J Scheffer; Petra A P Manger; Annemiek Hoek; Mesrure Kaplan; Dick B C Schoot; Arne M van Heusden; Walter K H Kuchenbecker; Denise A M Perquin; Kathrin Fleischer; Eugenie M Kaaijk; Alexander Sluijmer; Jaap Friederich; Joop S E Laven; Marcel van Hooff; Leonie A Louwe; Janet Kwee; Jantien J Boomgaard; Corry H de Koning; Ineke C A H Janssen; Femke Mol; Ben W J Mol; Helen L Torrance; Frank J M Broekmans
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2012-08-08       Impact factor: 2.809

3.  Clinical approach for the classification of congenital uterine malformations.

Authors:  Grigoris F Grimbizis; Rudi Campo
Journal:  Gynecol Surg       Date:  2012-03-10

Review 4.  The prevalence of congenital uterine anomalies in unselected and high-risk populations: a systematic review.

Authors:  Y Y Chan; K Jayaprakasan; J Zamora; J G Thornton; N Raine-Fenning; A Coomarasamy
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2011-06-24       Impact factor: 15.610

5.  The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies.

Authors:  Grigoris F Grimbizis; Attilio Di Spiezio Sardo; Sotirios H Saravelos; Stephan Gordts; Caterina Exacoustos; Dominique Van Schoubroeck; Carmina Bermejo; Nazar N Amso; Geeta Nargund; Dirk Timmermann; Apostolos Athanasiadis; Sara Brucker; Carlo De Angelis; Marco Gergolet; Tin Chiu Li; Vasilios Tanos; Basil Tarlatzis; Roy Farquharson; Luca Gianaroli; Rudi Campo
Journal:  Gynecol Surg       Date:  2015-11-04

6.  Uterine and Tubal Abnormalities in Infertile Saudi Arabian Women: A Teaching Hospital Experience.

Authors:  Haifa A Al-Turki; Abid H Gullenpet; Anjum Syed; Hind S Al-Saif; Bander F Aldhafery
Journal:  Saudi J Med Med Sci       Date:  2016-03-09

Review 7.  Stem cell-based therapy for ameliorating intrauterine adhesion and endometrium injury.

Authors:  Yu-Ting Song; Peng-Cheng Liu; Jie Tan; Chen-Yu Zou; Qian-Jin Li; Jesse Li-Ling; Hui-Qi Xie
Journal:  Stem Cell Res Ther       Date:  2021-10-30       Impact factor: 6.832

8.  Hysteroscopy as a minimally invasive surgery, a good substitute for invasive gynecological procedures.

Authors:  Seddigheh Abdollahi Fard; Parvin Mostafa Gharabaghi; Farnaz Montazeri; Omid Mashrabi
Journal:  Iran J Reprod Med       Date:  2012-07
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.