Cite this article
6
Downloads
1
Citations
22
Views
Announcements
Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology (CEOG) is published by IMR Press from Volume 47 Issue 1 (2020). Previous articles were published by another publisher on a subscription basis, and they are hosted by IMR Press on imrpress.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with S.O.G.
Original Research
Hysterosalpingography versus hysterscopy in intrauterine pathology research of infertile patients
Show Less
1
Medical Center, “Kosovska Mitrovica”, Kosovska Mitrovica
2
University of Belgrade, Medical Faculty, Belgrade
3
University Clinic for Obstetrics and Gynecology “Narodni front”, Belgrade (Serbia)
Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol. 2015, 42(2), 141–145;
https://doi.org/10.12891/ceog1745.2015
Published: 10 April 2015
Abstract
Background: The objective of the present paper is to confirm the validity and reliability of hysterosalpingography (HSG) in intrauterine pathology research of infertile female patients by comparing the hysteroscopy (HC) findings to a “gold standard’’ test. Aim: To analyze HSG and HC findings in infertility patients. Materials and Methods: The research was conducted as a prospective study at the Gynecological and Obstetrics Clinic “Narodni front’’ in Belgrade. Results: HSG indicated pathological findings in 72.5% of patients whereas HC revealed abnormalities of uterine cavity in 77.5%. In 12.5% of patients, HSG demonstrated a normal uterine cavity, and HC confirmed pathological findings, while in 7.5% of patients with filling defects and irregular shapes on HSG images, HC reported normal findings. In 22.5% of patients normal finding as well as endometrial polyps were reported; congenital malformations (anomalies)were found in 32.5%, submucosal myomas in 12.5% and Asherman’s syndrome in 10%. Conclusion: HC finding was crucial in final diagnosing.
Keywords
Hysterosalpingography
Hysteroscopy
Infertility
Uterine cavity