Comparative prospective study of Hysterosalpingography and hysteroscopy in infertile women

Aim: To compare the findings and diagnostic accuracy of Hysterosalpingography (HSG) and hysteroscopy in infertile women. Setting and Design: Prospective comparative study in a tertiary care Centre. Material and Methods: 108 women with primary or secondary infertility were recruited. In all women aft...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Leena Wadhwa (Author), Pooja Rani (Author), Pushpa Bhatia (Author)
Format: Book
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2017-01-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_b6981c40073e42b0ab6582261e3b51f7
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Leena Wadhwa  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Pooja Rani  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Pushpa Bhatia  |e author 
245 0 0 |a Comparative prospective study of Hysterosalpingography and hysteroscopy in infertile women 
260 |b Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications,   |c 2017-01-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 0974-1208 
500 |a 1998-4766 
500 |a 10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_123_16 
520 |a Aim: To compare the findings and diagnostic accuracy of Hysterosalpingography (HSG) and hysteroscopy in infertile women. Setting and Design: Prospective comparative study in a tertiary care Centre. Material and Methods: 108 women with primary or secondary infertility were recruited. In all women after basic infertility workup, both HSG and hysteroscopy were performed. Results: Out of 108 women, in 3 women HSG couldn't be done and in one woman there was uterine perforation on hysteroscopy. HSG showed normal uterine cavity in 77.8% (81/105) women and abnormal in 22.85% (24/105). Hysteroscopy findings were normal in 70.09% (75/107) and abnormal in 29.91% (32/107). Hysteroscopy detected incidental findings in 15.38% (16/104) cases. HSG showed irregular uterine cavity in 14.15% (15/105) women but on hysteroscopy; normal cavity was present in 6 (40%) women and abnormality was detected in 9 (60%) women. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive and negative predictive value of HSG in evaluating uterine cavity abnormalities were 44.83% (95% confidence interval (CI); 0.26-0.64), 86.67% (95% CI; 0.76-0.93), 56.52% (95% CI; 0.34-0.76) and 80.25% (95%CI; 0.69-0.88). Positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio of HSG in detecting uterine cavity abnormality was 3.36 and 0.64 respectively. The agreement between HSG and hysteroscopy was 75%. This was statistically significant (P value = 0.001) with fair strength of agreement between HSG and hysteroscopy. (k value= 0.336). Conclusion: Hysteroscopy should be performed in all infertile patients as it can detect significant number of incidental findings missed by HSG. 
546 |a EN 
690 |a Hysterosalpingography 
690 |a hysteroscopy 
690 |a infertility 
690 |a Gynecology and obstetrics 
690 |a RG1-991 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences, Vol 10, Iss 2, Pp 73-78 (2017) 
787 0 |n http://www.jhrsonline.org/article.asp?issn=0974-1208;year=2017;volume=10;issue=2;spage=73;epage=78;aulast=Wadhwa 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/0974-1208 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/1998-4766 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/b6981c40073e42b0ab6582261e3b51f7  |z Connect to this object online.