Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31360713›Full record

ReviewBioMed research international2019

Clinical Aspects of HyFoSy as Tubal Patency Test in Subfertility Workup.

Niek Exalto, Mark Hans Emanuel

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BioMed research international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06332027 (Accuracy of Hystro-Salpingo-Foam-Sonography), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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.

NCT06332027 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Accuracy of Hystro-Salpingo-Foam-Sonography (HYFOSY) as Tubal Patency Test in Comparison to Laparoscopy in Infertile Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorSohag UniversityRan2024 to 2025Enrolled122ConditionsInfertility, FemaleArmsHystro-Salpingo-Foam-Sonography (HYFOSY)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Niek ExaltoDivision of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4186-7711
Mark Hans EmanuelDivision of Woman and Baby, Department of Gynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, University Medical Centre, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Erasmus MC · NLGhent University Hospital · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTubal patency testing is an essential part of female subfertility evaluation. Traditionally, hysterosalpingography (HSG) was the first step to evaluate tubal patency. However, during the past decade Hysterosalpingo-Contrast Sonography (HyCoSy) was introduced in order to avoid radiation exposure and Hysterosalpingo-Foam Sonography (HyFoSy) has been developed as a safe and less painful alternative. OBJECTIVES AND RATIONALE: The aim of this narrative review is to provide an overview of the currently available HyFoSy literature and related clinical aspects. SEARCH

methodsA literature search was conducted using PubMed and Embase from the introduction of HyFoSy to March 2019. Unfortunately, a meta-analysis was not possible due to a too small number of studies, being mutually incomparable for the various subjects of clinical aspects, even for the reliability as a test for tubal patency. OUTCOMES: Nine small studies concluded that the accuracy and effectiveness as a test for tubal patency of 2D- and 3D-HyFoSy are comparable or even better than HSG or HyCoSy. With or without using Doppler techniques, 3D-HyFoSy does not seem to offer benefits above real-time 2D-HyFoSy. Five studies reported on pain and discomfort during HyFoSy, concluding that HyFoSy is a well-tolerated, less painful procedure compared to HSG, without a need for the use of analgesics. There are suggestions about an increased pregnancy rate in the first three cycles after the procedure but in no studies pregnancy outcome after HyFoSy was compared with other or no intervention. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: HyFoSy is a promising and safe alternative for HSG with regard to accuracy and effectiveness. HyFoSy lacks radiation and iodine exposure and is a well-tolerated and less painful procedure than HSG, without the need for analgesics. However more research is needed to make clear statements regarding a therapeutic effect of HyFoSy.

Indexed as

HysterosalpingographyAdultContrast MediaFallopian TubesFemaleHumansInfertility, FemalePregnancyPregnancy RateUltrasonographyContrast Media

Identifiers

PMID31360713
PMCPMC6644241
OpenAlexW2961564549

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.