Assessment of endometrial cavity of infertil patients with transvaginal sonography, hysterosalpingography, and hysterescopy

Yıl 2012, Cilt: 17 Sayı: 2, 67 - 71, 23.01.2013

Banu Bingol Faruk Abike Herman Isci

Öz

Abstract. To compare the accuracy of transvaginal sonography (TVS), hysterosalpingography (HSG) and hysteroscopy (HS) for uterine pathologies among infertile women. 168 women with diagnosis of infertility were enrolled in this study and assessed with TVS, HSG and HS. TVS, HSG and HS were carried out in all cases, in the 5^th-8^th days of follicular phase of the cycle.  Operative hysteroscopy with directed biopsy was considered as the gold standard. HSG, TVS, and HS were conducted by specialized gynecologists, who were blinded to the results of the other examinations. Endometrial polyp (n=66, 39%), submucous myoma (n=46, 28%), endometrial hyperplasia (n=29, 17%) and suspect of intrauterine synechia (n=27, 16%) were detected with TVS. In the evaluation with HSG results, submucous myoma or polyp (n=42, 25%), irregular uterine contour (n=29, 17%), intrauterine synechia (n=24, 15%) were detected. 73 patients (43%) had normal HSG results. HS (with or without resection) results detected endometrial polyp (n=59, 35%), submucous myoma (n=47, 28%), endometrial hyperplasia (n=35, 21%) and intrauterine synechia (n=27, 16%). Endometrial biopsy revealed no atypical hyperplasia of the endometrium. TVS is the primary investigative method for evaluating every infertile couple by means of uterine cavity and ovaries. TVS seems to be additional and superior to HSG. It is a candidate to be an easy and useful method in the detection of uterine abnormalities among infertile women including polypoid lesions, endometrial hyperplasia and submucosal myoma with respect to hysteroscopy as the gold standard. It can be suggested that HSG should be replaced by the diagnostic hysteroscopy as a first-line investigation for intrauterine pathologies in infertile patients.

Key words: Hysterosalpingography, hysteroscopy, infertility, intrauterine abnormalities, transvaginal sonography

Anahtar Kelimeler

-

Kaynakça

• Pundir J, El Toukhy T. Uterine cavity assessment prior to IVF. Womens Health (Lond Engl) 2010; 6:841-848.
• Wallach EE. The uterine factor in infertility. Fertil Steril 1972; 23: 138-158.
• Alborzi S, Dehbashi S, Khodaee R. Sonohysterosalpingographic screening for infertile patients. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2003; 82: 57-62.
• Emanuel MH, Verdel MJ, Wamsteker K, et al. A prospective comparison of transvaginal ultrasonography and diagnostic hysteroscopy in the evaluation of patients with abnormal uterine bleeding: clinical implications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172: 547-552.
• Fedele L, Bianchi S, Dorta M, et al. Intrauterine adhesions: detection with transvaginal USG. Radiology 1996; 199: 757-759.
• Nasri MN, Shepherd JH, Setchell ME, et al. The role of vaginal scan in measurement of endometrial thickness in postmenopausal women. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1991; 98: 470-475.
• Cicinelli E, Romano F, Anastasio PS, et al. Transabdominal sonohysterography, transvaginal sonography, and hysteroscopy in the evaluation of submucous myomas. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 85: 42-47.
• Roma Dalfó A, Ubeda B, Ubeda A, et al. Diagnostic value of hysterosalpingography in the detection of intrauterine abnormalities: a comparison with hysteroscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183:1405-1409.
• Gaglione R, Valentini AL, Pistilli E, et al. A comparison of hysteroscopy and Hysterosalpingography. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1996; 52: 151-153.
• Golan A, Eilat E, Ron-El R, et al. Hysteroscopy is superior to hysterosalpingography in infertility investigation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1996; 75:654-656.
• Brown SE, Coddington CC, Schnorr J, et al. Evaluation of outpatient hysteroscopy, saline infusion hysterosonography, and hysterosalpingography in infertile women: a prospective, randomized study. Fertil Steril 2000; 74: 1029-1034.
• Narayan R, Goswamy RK. Transvaginal sonography of the uterine cavity with hysteroscopic correlation in the investigation of infertility. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1993; 1: 129-133.
• Loverro G, Nappi L, Vicino M, et al. Uterine cavity assessment in infertile women: comparison of transvaginal sonography and hysteroscopy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001; 100: 67-71.
• Ayida G, Chamberlain P, Barlow D, et al. Uterine cavity assessment prior to in vitro fertilization: comparison of transvaginal scanning, saline contrast hysterosonography and hysteroscopy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1997; 10: 59-62.
• De Placido G, Clarizia R, Cadente C, et al. Compliance and diagnostic efficacy of minihysteroscopy versus traditional hysteroscopy in infertility investigation. Eur. J. Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2007; 135: 83-87.
• Brown SE, Coddington CC, Schnorr J, et al. Evaluation of outpatient hysteroscopy, saline infusion hysterosonography and hysterosalpingography in infertile women: a prospective, randomized study. Fertil Steril 2000; 74: 1029-1034.
• Allahbadia GN, Kadam K, Allahbadia S. Saline infusion sonohysterography (SIS). Reviews in Gyneacological Practice 2004; 4: 181-193.
• Cullinan JA, Fleischer AC, Kepple DM, Arnold AL. Sonohysterography: a technique for endometrial evaluation. Radio Graphics 1995; 15: 501-514.
• Kim AH, Mckay H, Keltz MD, Nelson HP, Adamson GD. Sonohysterographic screening before in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1998; 69: 841-844.
• Nanini R, Chelo R, Branconi F, Tantini C. Dynamic echohysterography: a new diagnostic technique. Acta Eur Fertil 1994; 12: 167-171.
• Soares SR, Barbosa dos Reis MM, Camargos AF. Diagnostic accuracy of sonohysterography, transvaginal sonography, and hysterosalpingography in patients with uterine cavity diseases. Fertil Steril 2000; 73: 406-411.
• Ragni G, Diaferia D, Vegetti W, et al. Effectiveness of sonohysterography in infertile patient work-up: a comparison with transvaginal ultrasonography and hysteroscopy. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2005; 59: 184-188.
• Allahbadia GN, Sheth SS. Hysteroscopic surgery in infertility. Ind J Gynaecol Endoscopy 1996; 1: 25-32.