ArticleActa radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden : 1987)2017
Tubal patency during the menstrual cycle and during treatment with hormonal contraceptives: a pilot study in women.
Article in Acta radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden : 1987), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intrauterine fluid instillation to confirm tubal occlusion after transcervical permanent contraception: A pilot studyContraception · 2020Article
- Effect of menstrual cycle phase and hormonal treatments on evaluation of tubal patency in baboons.Journal of medical primatology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Hysterosalpingram (HSG) evaluation of tubal patency is typically performed in the follicular phase, but data to support this timing are lacking. Purpose To determine whether menstrual cycle phase or hormonal treatments affect observation of tubal patency during HSG. Material and Methods Ten participants underwent repeated HSG examinations: during the follicular and luteal phase of a natural menstrual cycle; 30 days following continuous administration of a combined oral contraceptive (COC); and 30 days after an intramuscular injection of depo medroxyprogesterone (DMPA) acetate. Participants with tubal blockade following DMPA had a fifth HSG 30 days following a second course of COCs. The primary outcome was tubal patency. Results All 10 participants demonstrated bilateral tubal patency (BTP) on at least one HSG examination during the study. One participant showed bilateral functional occlusion (FO) during the follicular phase examination, but BTP with the luteal phase, COC cycle, and DMPA exams. One participant with BTP discontinued participation and nine completed the COC HSG exam with BTP in seven, and one each with bilateral or unilateral FO. Seven participants completed the DMPA HSG with BTP in six and unilateral FO in one; BTP was seen in the final HSG after restarting the COC. Conclusion This pilot study supports the luteal phase of natural cycles as the optimum time for evaluation of tubal patency. The occurrence of functional occlusion of the fallopian tube on HSG examination performed during the follicular phase and following contraceptive steroid treatment supports a role of hormonal action on the utero-tubal junction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.