OC075: Reproducibility of the measurement of submucous fibroid protrusion into the uterine cavity using three-dimensional saline infusion sonohysterography

ABSTRACT Objective To compare the diagnostic efficacy of saline infusion sonohysterography (SIS) with hysterolaparoscopy in evaluation of uterine cavity and tubal patency. Methods This prospective one year cross-sectional study was conducted at the assisted reproduction center (ARC), KLES Dr Prabhakar Kore Hospital and Medical Research Centre, Belgaum. A total of 60 patients underwent SIS for evaluation of uterine cavity and tubal patency. Subsequently all patients underwent hysterolaparoscopy with chromopertubation (CPT). Results of SIS and hysterolaparoscopy with chromopertubation were compared. Results For evaluation of uterine cavity, when compared with hysteroscopy, SIS had a sensitivity of 97.8%, specificity of 88.8%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 97.8% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 88.8%. For evaluation of tubal patency when SIS was compared to laparoscopy with CPT, SIS had a sensitivity of 83.3%, specificity of 82.9%, PPV of 42.9% and NPV of 97.5%. Conclusion Saline infusion sonohysterography is a noninvasive, simple, easy and cost-effective procedure. SIS is more sensitive and specific for evaluation of uterine cavity as compared to evaluation of tubal patency.

Download Full-text

Evaluation of Uterine Cavity Abnormality using Saline Infusion Sonohysterography Before In Vitro Fertilization

Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences ◽

10.3889/oamjms.2021.6884 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (B) ◽

pp. 917-920

Author(s):

Ichwanul Adenin ◽

Hilma Putri Lubis ◽

Binarwan Halim

Keyword(s):

In Vitro Fertilization ◽

Treatment Success ◽

Uterine Cavity ◽

Saline Infusion ◽

Infertile Woman ◽

Success Rates ◽

Endometrial Polyps ◽

Vitro Fertilization ◽

Saline Infusion Sonohysterography

BACKGROUND: Some studies suggested that saline infusion sonohysterography (SIS) has been used to detect uterine cavity abnormalities before in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles to improve treatment success rates and decrease the number of cycle cancellations and embryo implantation failures. Some of the factors contributing to the dissemination and acceptance of the technique include the fact that it is a simple, less painful, less expensive, less invasive, and well-tolerated procedure when compared to hysteroscopy. AIM: The aim of the study is to evaluate uterine cavity abnormality with SIS performed before IVF. METHODS: A descriptive retrospective study involving 551 female partners who had SIS before IVF/ICSI treatment at private Halim Fertility Center from January 2014 until December 2017. Five hundred and fifty-one infertile woman was included in this study before IVF/ICSI cycles. Patients agreed to have an ultrasound assessment of the uterine cavity with the use of saline as the contrast medium. SIS procedure was scheduled postmenstrual period in the early-mid follicular phase and 1-3 months before starting IVF/ICSI treatment. RESULTS: From 551 patients, we found 527 (94.4%) cases with the normal uterine cavity. The uterine cavity abnormalities were detected in 5.56% of cases included in this study (28 (5.02%) cases with endometrial polyps, two (0.36%) cases with intrauterine adhesions, and one (0.18%) case with Müllerian duct anomalies). CONCLUSION: SIS before IVF treatment could be a good option for evaluating uterus cavity before IVF to improve success rates of pregnancy.

Download Full-text