Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24605262›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical imaging science2013

Venous intravasation as a complication and potential pitfall during hysterosalpingography: re-emerging study with a novel classification.

Abdurrahim Dusak, Hatice E Soydinc, Hakan Onder, Faysal Ekinci, Neval Y Görük, Cihat Hamidi, Aslan Bilici

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical imaging science, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Tubal flushing for subfertility.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Venous intravasation during hysterosalpingography.The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences · 2019
    Article
  14. Contrast Intravasation During Hysterosalpingography.Polish journal of radiology · 2016
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Abdurrahim DusakDepartment of Radiology, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey.
Hatice E SoydincDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey.
Hakan OnderDepartment of Radiology, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey.
Faysal EkinciDepartment of Radiology, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey.
Neval Y GörükDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey.
Cihat HamidiDepartment of Radiology, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey.
Aslan BiliciDepartment of Radiology, Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPresently, hysterosalpingography (HSG) is used as a means to evaluate women with infertility and repetitive pregnancy loss. Venous intravasation is a complication and potential pitfall during HSG and analogous procedures including hysteroscopy. The aim of our study was to assess the venous intravasation and to obtain critical information for more secure and more accurate procedures. In particular, the primary goal of the present study was to compare HSG without and with intravasation to identify differences seen on HSG and to assess the predisposing factors of intravasation. The secondary goal was to describe clinical- and imaging-based novel classification of intravasation. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study included a patient cohort of 569 patients who underwent HSG between 2008 and 2011 at our center in the absence (control group) or presence (study group) of intravasation. Intravasation classified from level 0 (no intravasation) to level 3 (severe intravasation) was compared with preprocedural (demographic and clinical) and procedural (HSG) data. Data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) statistical software.

resultsOf the 569 patients undergoing HSG, 528 showed no intravasation and 41 (7.2%) patients showed intravasation when associated with preprocedural (leukocytes, menometrorrhagia, secondary infertility, ectopic pregnancy, abortus, polycystic ovaries, endometriosis, and interventions) and procedural (pain, scheduling, endometrial-uterine nature, and spillage) parameters. Moreover, intravasation was lower in women with smooth endometrium, triangular uterus, and homogeneous peritoneal spillage. No association was found between age, tubal patency, increased pressure, and intravasation.

conclusionsUsing a novel classification method, intravasation can be observed in women during HSG and associates with preprocedural and procedural predisposing factors in subsumed conditions. This classification method will be useful for improving the efficiency and accuracy of HSG and related procedures by minimization of severe complications caused by intravasation.

Indexed as

Complicationshysterosalpingographynovel classificationpotential pitfalls venous intravasation

Identifiers

PMID24605262
PMCPMC3935269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.