• A Watson, P Vandekerckhove, R Lilford, A Vail, I Brosens, and E Hughes.
• Institute of Epidemiology and Health Services Research, University of Leeds, United Kingdom.
• Fertil. Steril. 1994 Mar 1; 61 (3): 470-7.

ObjectiveTo evaluate the therapeutic effect of oil-soluble contrast media compared with water-soluble contrast media after hysterosalpingography (HSG) in infertile couples.DesignMeta-analysis of four randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and six nonrandomized controlled studies evaluating pregnancy rates after the use of oil- or water-soluble contrast media during HSG.SettingInstitute of Epidemiology and Health Services Research, Leeds, United Kingdom.PatientsFour identified RCTs studied 800 patients and six nonrandomized studies comprised an additional 1,806 patients, all experiencing primary or secondary infertility.InterventionHysterosalpingography as part of infertility investigation.Main Outcome MeasurePregnancy rates after HSG.ResultsPregnancy rates were significantly higher in the oil-soluble contrast media group compared with the water-soluble contrast media group in the RCTs. Inclusion of the six nonrandomized studies did not alter this conclusion. This apparent benefit was greatest for patients with unexplained infertility.ConclusionsOil-soluble contrast media have a therapeutic effect compared with water-soluble media and this effect is greatest for patients who have been diagnosed as having unexplained infertility. New techniques for the evaluation of tubal patency support the hypothesis that tubal "plugs" may be involved in proximal tubal blockage.

18 keywords...

hide…