The diagnostic value of hysterosalpingography in the diagnosis of tubal disease

Česká verzia

Authors: R. Středa; Tonko Mardešič; D. Kult; S. Lazarovská; J. Slámová; J. Vobořil
Authors place of work: Sanatorium Pronatal, Praha, vedoucí lékař doc. MUDr. T. Mardešič, CSc.
Published in the journal: Ceska Gynekol 2009; 74(1): 18-21

Summary

Objective:
To present an overview of trials and discussion focused on the diagnostic value of hysterosalpingography in the diagnosis of tubal disease.

Subject:
Review article.

Setting:
Sanatorium Pronatal, Prague.

Conclusions:
Hysterosalpingography may be a screening test for tubal patency. Data demonstrates high specificity of hysterosalpingography for diagnosis of proximal tubal occlusion or hydrosalpinx and low sensitivity in cases with peritubal adhesions. Routine use of diagnostic laparoscopy should be delayed for asymptomatic women. It is expected hysteroscopy and transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy for asymptomatic women may decrease indications for diagnostic laparoscopy with complete visualization of the pelvic cavity.

Key words:
infertility, hysterosalpingography, proximal tubal occlusion, distal tubal occlusion, hydrosalpinx, peritubal adhesions, diagnostic value.

Zdroje

1. Diagnosis and management of the infertile couple: missing information. ESHRE Capri Workshop Group. Hum.Reprod.Update. 2004, 10, p. 295-307.

2. Balasch, J. Investigation of the infertile couple: investigation of the infertile couple in the era of assisted reproductive technology: a time for reappraisal. Hum Reprod, 2000, 15, p. 2251-2257.

3. Baramki, EA. Hysterosalpingography. Fertil Steril, 2005, 83, 6, p. 1595-1606.

4. Bosteels, J., Van Herendael, B., Weyers, S., et al. The position of diagnostic laparoscopy in current fertility practice. Hum Reprod Update, 2007, 13, p. 477-845.

5. Brinsden, PR. A textbook of In Vitro fertilization and assisted reproduction. New York: Parthenon Publishing, 1999, p. 257-265.

6. Campana, A., de Agostini, A., Bischof, P., et al. Evaluation of infertility. Hum Reprod Update, 1995, 1, p. 586-606.

7. Citterbart, K. Gynekologie. Praha: Galén, 2001, s. 70.

8. Gardner, DK., Weissman, A., Howles, CM., et al. Textbook of assisted reproductive techniques. London: Martin Dunitz, 2001.

9. Hořejší, J. Dětská gynekologie. Praha: Avicenum, 1990, s. 85.

10. Keck, C., Tempfer, CB., Huques, JN. Conservative infertility management. Informa, 2007, p. 56-67.

11. Koryntová, D., Jelinková, L., Řežábek, K., et al. Léčba idiopatické neplodnosti. Čes Gynek, 1999, 64, s. 159-163.

12. Lavy, Y., Lev-Sagie, A., Holtzer, H., et al. Should laparoscopy be a mandatory component of the infertility evaluation in infertile women with normal hysterosalpingogram or suspected unilateral distal tubal pathology? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2004, 114, p. 64-68.

13. Mardešič, T., Vobořil, J., Bečvářová, V., et al. Effect of salpingectomy on the results of IVF in women with tubal sterility—prospective study. Čes Gynek, 2001, 66, s. 259-264.

14. Mardešič, T. Transvaginální endoskopie- pokrok nebo výstřelek? XIV. konference Sekce gynekologické endoskopie, 33, 2005.

15. Mardešič, T. Význam endoskopie při současném vývoji asistované reprodukce. Praha: Sanguis 2005, s. 20.

16. Martius, G., Breckwoldt, M., Pfleiderer, A. Gynekologie a porodnictví. Stuttgart: Georg Thieme Verlag, 1996, p. 381.

17. Mol, BW., Swart, P., Bossuyt, PM., et al. Reproducibility of the interpretation of hysterosalpingography in the diagnosis of tubal pathology. Hum Reprod, 1996, 11, p. 1204-1208.

18. Mol, BW., Collins, JA., Burrows, EA., et al. Comparison of hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy in predicting fertility outcome. Hum Reprod, 1999, 14, p. 1237-1242.

19. Papaioannou, S. Tubal assessment tests: still have not found what are we looking for. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 2007, 15, 4, p. 376-382.

20. Pernoll, ML. Current Obstetric & Gynecologic Diagnosis & Treatment. Lange medical book, 1991, p. 1031.

21. Perquin, DA., Dorr, PJ., de Craen, AJ., et al. Routine use of hysterosalpingography prior to laparoscopy in the fertility workup: a multicentre randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod, 2006, 21, p. 1227-1231.

22. Rabe T. Memorix gynekologie. Praha: Scientia Medica, 1993, p. 68-69.

23. Shaw R, Soutter WP, Stanton SL. Gynaecology. London: Churchill Livingstone, 2003, p. 288.

24. Snowden, EU., Jarrett, JC., Dawood, MY. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopy, hysteroscopy, and hysterosalpingography in evaluation of female infertility. Fertil Steril, 1984, 41, p. 709-713.

25. Středa, R. Predikční hodnota hysterosalpingografie v diagnostice tubárního faktoru neplodnosti. 7. česko - slovenská konference reprodukční gynekologie a 18. celostátní sympozium asistované reprodukce, Brno, 19.-20.11.2008.

26. Swart, P., Mol, BW., van Beurden, M., et al. The accuracy of hysterosalpingography in the diagnosis of tubal pathology: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril, 1995, 64, p. 486-491.

27. Tanahatoe, S., Lambalk, C., McDonnell, J., et al. Diagnostic laparoscopy is needed after abnormal hysterosalpingography to prevent over-treatment with IVF. Reprod Biomed Online, 2008, 16, p. 410-415.

28. Tanahatoe, SJ., Hompes, PG., Lambalk, CB. Investigation of the infertile couple: should diagnostic laparoscopy be performed in the infertility work up programme in patients undergoing intrauterine insemination? Hum Reprod, 2003, 18, p. 8-11.