• Demetra Socolov, Ivona Anghelache Lupaşcu, Elena Danciu, B Doroftei, Iuliana Boian, L Boiculese, Petronela Pintilie, and Nora Miron.
• Facultatea de Medicină, Departamentul de Obstetrică - Ginecologie, Universitatea de Medicină si Farmacie "Gr.T. Popa" Iaşi.
• Rev Med Chir Soc Med Nat Iasi. 2009 Jul 1;113(3):803-8.

ObjectiveThe evaluation of the role of sonohysterosalpingography with saline with air as a contrast solution (HYCOSY), in the assessment of uterine cavity and tubal patency, versus hysterosalpingography (HSG) and laparoscopy with dye test combined with hysteroscopy.Material And MethodProspective study of 95 infertility patients, with ages 25-40 years (median 31), in which HYCOSY was compared with HSG regarding the diagnostic acuracy for uterine cavity pathology and tubal patency, and compared to laparoscopy with dye test combined with hysteroscopy as gold standard.ResultsThe sensibility, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for the diagnostic of uterine cavity pathology was: HYCOSY versus hysteroscopy of 72.1%, 96.15%, 93.93% and 80.64% respectively; HSG versus hysteroscopy was 83.3%, 60.7%, 63.6% and 81.6%; both methods combined versus hysteroscopy 95.34%, 61.53%, 67.21% and 94.11%. The same parameters for the tubal patency were: HYCOSY versus dye test laparoscopy 81.39%, 87.69%, 67.30% and 97.79%; HSG versus dye test laparoscopy 61.9%, 85.3%, 56.5% and 87.9%; both methods combined versus dye test 86%, 76%, 52.9% and 94.6%.ConclusionHYCOSY can be used in combination with HSG for selecting the patients that need further more invasive investigations, in order to describe uterine and tubal pathology.

23 keywords...

hide…