Comparison between findings of saline infusion sonohysterography and office hysteroscopy in patients with recurrent implantation failure

Aim: This study aims to determine the accuracy of saline infusion sonohysterography (SIS) in the diagnosis of intrauterine pathologies in women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF). Settings and Design: This is a prospective cross-over study which was carried out during the period between Decem...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ahmed Reda, Ahmed Sherif Abdel Hamid, Rowaa Mostafa, Eman Refaei
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2016-01-01
Series:Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.jhrsonline.org/article.asp?issn=0974-1208;year=2016;volume=9;issue=4;spage=236;epage=240;aulast=Reda
_version_ 1828742244137435136
author Ahmed Reda
Ahmed Sherif Abdel Hamid
Rowaa Mostafa
Eman Refaei
author_facet Ahmed Reda
Ahmed Sherif Abdel Hamid
Rowaa Mostafa
Eman Refaei
author_sort Ahmed Reda
collection DOAJ
description Aim: This study aims to determine the accuracy of saline infusion sonohysterography (SIS) in the diagnosis of intrauterine pathologies in women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF). Settings and Design: This is a prospective cross-over study which was carried out during the period between December 2013 and July 2014. Materials and Methods: The study involved sixty subfertile women with a history of RIF. All cases underwent a transvaginal ultrasonography, SIS and then an office hysteroscopy (1 day after SIS) during early follicular phase. SIS was carried out by same sonographer, and then hysteroscopy was carried out by same gynecologist who was kept blind to findings at SIS. Statistical Analysis: Was done using IBM© SPSS© Statistics version 22. The sensitivity of SIS was calculated as it equals: True positive by SIS/all positive (true cases by hysteroscopy) and specificity was calculated as it equals: True negative by SIS/all negatives (normal by hysteroscopy). Results: Overall uterine abnormalities were significantly less likely to be identified with SIS compared to hysteroscopy (P = 0.002), but analysis of each finding separately demonstrated a comparable difference between SIS and hysteroscopy (P > 0.05). We found that the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of SIS to detect intrauterine pathology is 41.2%, 100%, 100%, and 81.1%, respectively. Conclusion: Our findings suggest a good role of SIS in the workup for RIF saving more invasive procedure for selected cases.
first_indexed 2024-04-13T01:15:04Z
format Article
id doaj.art-08a7a25c888f47fb91b7e8e977a1163d
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 0974-1208
1998-4766
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-13T01:15:04Z
publishDate 2016-01-01
publisher Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
record_format Article
series Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences
spelling doaj.art-08a7a25c888f47fb91b7e8e977a1163d2022-12-22T03:08:56ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Human Reproductive Sciences0974-12081998-47662016-01-019423624010.4103/0974-1208.197661Comparison between findings of saline infusion sonohysterography and office hysteroscopy in patients with recurrent implantation failureAhmed RedaAhmed Sherif Abdel HamidRowaa MostafaEman RefaeiAim: This study aims to determine the accuracy of saline infusion sonohysterography (SIS) in the diagnosis of intrauterine pathologies in women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF). Settings and Design: This is a prospective cross-over study which was carried out during the period between December 2013 and July 2014. Materials and Methods: The study involved sixty subfertile women with a history of RIF. All cases underwent a transvaginal ultrasonography, SIS and then an office hysteroscopy (1 day after SIS) during early follicular phase. SIS was carried out by same sonographer, and then hysteroscopy was carried out by same gynecologist who was kept blind to findings at SIS. Statistical Analysis: Was done using IBM© SPSS© Statistics version 22. The sensitivity of SIS was calculated as it equals: True positive by SIS/all positive (true cases by hysteroscopy) and specificity was calculated as it equals: True negative by SIS/all negatives (normal by hysteroscopy). Results: Overall uterine abnormalities were significantly less likely to be identified with SIS compared to hysteroscopy (P = 0.002), but analysis of each finding separately demonstrated a comparable difference between SIS and hysteroscopy (P > 0.05). We found that the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of SIS to detect intrauterine pathology is 41.2%, 100%, 100%, and 81.1%, respectively. Conclusion: Our findings suggest a good role of SIS in the workup for RIF saving more invasive procedure for selected cases.http://www.jhrsonline.org/article.asp?issn=0974-1208;year=2016;volume=9;issue=4;spage=236;epage=240;aulast=RedaHysterosonographyrecurrent implantation failuresaline infusion sonohysterographysonohysterography
spellingShingle Ahmed Reda
Ahmed Sherif Abdel Hamid
Rowaa Mostafa
Eman Refaei
Comparison between findings of saline infusion sonohysterography and office hysteroscopy in patients with recurrent implantation failure
Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences
Hysterosonography
recurrent implantation failure
saline infusion sonohysterography
sonohysterography
title Comparison between findings of saline infusion sonohysterography and office hysteroscopy in patients with recurrent implantation failure
title_full Comparison between findings of saline infusion sonohysterography and office hysteroscopy in patients with recurrent implantation failure
title_fullStr Comparison between findings of saline infusion sonohysterography and office hysteroscopy in patients with recurrent implantation failure
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between findings of saline infusion sonohysterography and office hysteroscopy in patients with recurrent implantation failure
title_short Comparison between findings of saline infusion sonohysterography and office hysteroscopy in patients with recurrent implantation failure
title_sort comparison between findings of saline infusion sonohysterography and office hysteroscopy in patients with recurrent implantation failure
topic Hysterosonography
recurrent implantation failure
saline infusion sonohysterography
sonohysterography
url http://www.jhrsonline.org/article.asp?issn=0974-1208;year=2016;volume=9;issue=4;spage=236;epage=240;aulast=Reda
work_keys_str_mv AT ahmedreda comparisonbetweenfindingsofsalineinfusionsonohysterographyandofficehysteroscopyinpatientswithrecurrentimplantationfailure
AT ahmedsherifabdelhamid comparisonbetweenfindingsofsalineinfusionsonohysterographyandofficehysteroscopyinpatientswithrecurrentimplantationfailure
AT rowaamostafa comparisonbetweenfindingsofsalineinfusionsonohysterographyandofficehysteroscopyinpatientswithrecurrentimplantationfailure
AT emanrefaei comparisonbetweenfindingsofsalineinfusionsonohysterographyandofficehysteroscopyinpatientswithrecurrentimplantationfailure