Literature DB >> 8705414

A comparison of patient tolerance of hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography (HyCoSy) with Echovist-200 and X-ray hysterosalpingography for outpatient investigation of infertile women.

G Ayida1, S Kennedy, D Barlow, P Chamberlain.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess patient tolerance of two outpatient tests. Sixty-six infertile women were prospectively randomized to hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography (HyCoSy) (n = 34) or X-ray hysterosalpingography (HSG) (n = 32). The procedures were performed by the same operator. The uterine cavity outline and tubal patency were determined by both procedures. The mean times taken and the volume of contrast medium required for HyCoSy and HSG were similar: 12.1 +/- 5.2 and 9.5 +/- 4.8 min and 9.4 +/- 5.2 and 11.5 +/- 8.4 ml, respectively. Side-effects were assessed during the procedure, at 2 h, 24 h and 28 days. The most common side-effect was pelvic pain, in 56/66 (84%) women, occurring during the procedures (HyCoSy 19/34 (56%); HSG 23/32 (72/%)) and/or in the following 24 h (HyCoSy 14/34 (41%); HSG 15/32 (47%)). This was described as less severe or equal to their usual period pains (HyCoSy 100%; HSG 85%). Only 12/66 (18%) women required simple non-steroidal analgesia (HyCoSy 8/34 (24%); HSG 4/32 (13%)). There were no significant differences between the two methods concerning the frequency or severity of pains at different stages during and after the procedure or analgesia requirements. HyCoSy and HSG are equally well tolerated outpatient procedures for assessing tubal patency and uterine abnormalities. In addition, HyCoSy avoids the risks of ovarian irradiation and allows scanning of the uterine corpus and ovaries at the same time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8705414     DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1996.07030201.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0960-7692            Impact factor:   7.299


  13 in total

1.  Sonohysterosalpingography: a suitable choice in infertility workup.

Authors:  Angela Graziano; Giuseppe Lo Monte; Ilaria Soave; Donatella Caserta; Massimo Moscarini; Roberto Marci
Journal:  J Med Ultrason (2001)       Date:  2012-11-23       Impact factor: 1.314

2.  Comparison of sonohysterography to hysterosalpingogram for tubal patency assessment in a multicenter fertility treatment trial among women with polycystic ovary syndrome.

Authors:  Mindy S Christianson; Richard S Legro; Susan Jin; Esther Eisenberg; Michael P Diamond; Karl R Hansen; Wendy Vitek; Aaron K Styer; Peter Casson; Christos Coutifaris; Gregory M Christman; Ruben Alvero; Elizabeth E Puscheck; Alicia Y Christy; Fangbai Sun; Heping Zhang; Alex J Polotsky; Nanette Santoro
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-09-07       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Assessing tubal damage.

Authors:  Madhuri Patil
Journal:  J Hum Reprod Sci       Date:  2009-01

4.  Randomized controlled trial of benzocaine versus placebo spray for pain relief at hysterosalpingogram.

Authors:  E A Bachman; S Senapati; M D Sammel; S K Kalra
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2014-03-04       Impact factor: 3.828

Review 5.  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

6.  Comparison of four different pain relief methods during hysterosalpingography: a randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Bekir Serdar Unlu; Mehmet Yilmazer; Gulengul Koken; Dagistan Tolga Arioz; Ebru Unlu; Elif Dogan Baki; Cemile Kurttay; Osman Karacin
Journal:  Pain Res Manag       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.037

7.  Effectiveness of paracervical block for pain relief in women undergoing hysterosalpingography.

Authors:  Shikha Jain; Dattaprasad B Inamdar; Abha Majumdar; Deepak K Jain
Journal:  J Hum Reprod Sci       Date:  2016 Oct-Dec

8.  Hysterosalpingocontrast sonography (HyCoSy): evaluation of the pain perception, side effects and complications.

Authors:  Roberto Marci; Immacolata Marcucci; Aurelio Aniceto Marcucci; Nicolina Pacini; Pietro Salacone; Annalisa Sebastianelli; Luisa Caponecchia; Giuseppe Lo Monte; Rocco Rago
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2013-08-23       Impact factor: 1.930

Review 9.  Imaging techniques for assessment of tubal status.

Authors:  Sonal Panchal; Chaitanya Nagori
Journal:  J Hum Reprod Sci       Date:  2014-01

10.  Preovulatory uterine flushing with saline as a treatment for unexplained infertility: a randomised controlled trial protocol.

Authors:  Sarah Maheux-Lacroix; Sylvie Dodin; Lynne Moore; Emmanuel Bujold; Jessica Lefebvre; Marie-Ève Bergeron
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.