Angela Graziano1, Giuseppe Lo Monte1, Ilaria Soave1, Donatella Caserta2, Massimo Moscarini2, Roberto Marci3. 1. Section of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Advanced Therapies, University of Ferrara, Corso Giovecca n. 203, 44121, Ferrara, Italy. 2. Department of Woman Health and Territory's Medicine, University of Rome Sapienza, S. Andrea Hospital, Rome, Italy. 3. Section of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Advanced Therapies, University of Ferrara, Corso Giovecca n. 203, 44121, Ferrara, Italy. roberto.marci@unife.it.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy, compliance, and cost effectiveness of sonohysterosalpingography (HyCoSy) compared with hysteroscopy for uterine cavity evaluation and compared with RX-hysterosalpingography (RX-HSG) for tubal patency determination. METHODS: Three hundred and eight infertile patients underwent HyCoSy, hysteroscopy, and RX-HSG. We compared sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV), discomfort level, and cost of all three procedures. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were higher for HyCoSy than for hysteroscopy but the differences were not significant. HyCoSy also has the same accuracy as RX-HSG. Pain perception and cost were higher for RX-HSG and hysteroscopy than for HyCoSy. CONCLUSIONS: HyCoSy can be regarded as a procedure for initial evaluation of the uterine cavity and of tubal patency in infertile patients.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy, compliance, and cost effectiveness of sonohysterosalpingography (HyCoSy) compared with hysteroscopy for uterine cavity evaluation and compared with RX-hysterosalpingography (RX-HSG) for tubal patency determination. METHODS: Three hundred and eight infertilepatients underwent HyCoSy, hysteroscopy, and RX-HSG. We compared sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV), discomfort level, and cost of all three procedures. RESULTS: Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were higher for HyCoSy than for hysteroscopy but the differences were not significant. HyCoSy also has the same accuracy as RX-HSG. Pain perception and cost were higher for RX-HSG and hysteroscopy than for HyCoSy. CONCLUSIONS: HyCoSy can be regarded as a procedure for initial evaluation of the uterine cavity and of tubal patency in infertilepatients.
Authors: S Tanawattanacharoen; S Suwajanakorn; B Uerpairojkit; W Boonkasemsanti; P Virutamasen Journal: J Obstet Gynaecol Res Date: 2000-02 Impact factor: 1.730
Authors: C Exacoustos; A Di Giovanni; B Szabolcs; V Romeo; M E Romanini; D Luciano; E Zupi; D Arduini Journal: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 7.299
Authors: Carina C W Chan; Ernest H Y Ng; Oi-Shan Tang; Karen K L Chan; Pak-Chung Ho Journal: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: F Moro; L Selvaggi; F Sagnella; A Morciano; D Martinez; M F Gangale; A Ciardulli; C Palla; M L Uras; E De Feo; S Boccia; A Tropea; A Lanzone; R Apa Journal: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 7.299