Literature DB >> 9806269

Routine use of saline hysterosonography in 500 consecutive, unselected, infertile women.

J A Hamilton1, A J Larson, A M Lower, S Hasnain, J G Grudzinskas.   

Abstract

Saline hysterosonography was attempted as a routine, first-line screening test of uterine structure in 500 consecutive, unselected, infertile women. The procedure was completed in 96.8% (484/500) women and the observations were interpretable in 483 of these women. Intrauterine pathology was suspected in 67/499 (13.4%) women on plain ultrasound scan and 58/484 (12%) women with saline hysterosonography. Ultrasound alone had a superior specificity (96.3%) to sensitivity (81.8%) and better negative (97.6%) than positive (73.8%) predictive value for the detection of any intrauterine abnormality, using saline hysterosonography as the reference procedure. Suspected pathology at saline hysterosonography led to hysteroscopy in 20 women, after a median of 5.7 months (range, 1-14). The overall concordance rate between the two procedures was 65% with lesions suspicious of intrauterine polyps not present at subsequent hysteroscopy on six occasions. Criteria were established to help identify women with potentially self-limiting lesions, in whom a re-scan should be considered before resorting to hysteroscopy. The procedure was well tolerated with no significant complications. Saline hysterosonography appeared to be an acceptable first-line screening procedure for uterine structure which enhanced the predictive power of ultrasound alone for uterine anomalies and provided additional information which was potentially of value when planning operative hysteroscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9806269     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/13.9.2463

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  6 in total

Review 1.  Modern assessment of the uterine cavity and fallopian tubes in the era of high-efficacy assisted reproductive technology.

Authors:  Kate Devine; Shelley Dolitsky; Inga Ludwin; Artur Ludwin
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2022-07       Impact factor: 7.490

Review 2.  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

3.  Saline infusion sonohysterography versus hysteroscopy for uterine cavity evaluation.

Authors:  Faryal Khan; Sadia Jamaat; Dania Al-Jaroudi
Journal:  Ann Saudi Med       Date:  2011 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.526

4.  Uterine cavity assessment in infertile women: Sensitivity and specificity of three-dimensional Hysterosonography versus Hysteroscopy.

Authors:  Firoozeh Ahmadi; Zohreh Rashidy; Hadieh Haghighi; Mohamadreza Akhoond; Maryam Niknejadi; Mandana Hemat; Mansour Shamsipour
Journal:  Iran J Reprod Med       Date:  2013-12

Review 5.  Evidence-based management of recurrent miscarriages.

Authors:  Yadava B Jeve; William Davies
Journal:  J Hum Reprod Sci       Date:  2014-07

6.  ROUTINE SALINE INFUSION SONOHYSTEROGRAPHY PRIOR TO ASSISTED CONCEPTION: A REVIEW OF OUR INITIAL EXPERIENCE.

Authors:  G Obajimi; B Ogunkinle
Journal:  Ann Ib Postgrad Med       Date:  2016-12
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.