Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2018 Dec 28. pii: S1701-2163(18)30810-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jogc.2018.10.001. [Epub ahead of print]

Hysterosalpingosonography Is Not as Effective as Hysterosalpingography to Increase Chances of Pregnancy.

Author information

1
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Québec, QC; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Québec, QC. Electronic address: sarah.maheux-lacroix@crchudequebec.ulaval.ca.
2
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Québec, QC.
3
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Québec, QC; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Québec, QC.
4
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec-Université Laval, Québec, QC.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

This study sought to examine whether hysterosalpingosonography (sono-HSG) is as effective as hysterosalpingography (HSG) in facilitating conception by comparing pregnancy rates in the 6 months following the procedures.

METHODS:

This retrospective noninferiority study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2) was conducted at a tertiary university centre. The investigators studied 440 consecutive eligible infertile women. Bilateral tubal occlusion, severe male infertility, and having undergone both procedures were exclusion criteria. Tubal testing, as part of the infertility workup, was performed by either sono-HSG or HSG. The primary outcome was pregnancy, defined as a positive fetal heartbeat on ultrasonographic examination, in the 6 months following the procedure.

RESULTS:

A total of 57 pregnancies (26%) were observed in the HSG group and 33 (15%) in the sono-HSG group. Adjusted and non-adjusted relative risks of pregnancy in the 6 months following sono-HSG compared with HSG were 0.61 (95% CI 0.42-0.89) and 0.58 (95% CI 0.39-0.85). Adverse events were infrequent with both procedures (sono-HSG, 1%; HSG, 4%; P = 0.16).

CONCLUSION:

This study suggests that uterine flushing as performed during sono-HSG is not as effective as when performed during HSG to increase the chances of pregnancy, but further studies will be required because of bias related to the retrospective study design.

KEYWORDS:

AMH anti-Müllerian hormone; HSG hysterosalpingography; Hysterosalpingosonography; Sono-HSG hysterosalpingosonography; flushing; hysterosalpingography; infertility; pregnancy

PMID:
30595514
DOI:
10.1016/j.jogc.2018.10.001

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center