ArticleActa radiologica open2024
Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal ultrasonography and hysterosalpingography in the detection of uterine cavity pathologies among infertile women.
Article in Acta radiologica open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Maternal and fetal outcomes in women with uterine congenital abnormalities: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Maternal health, neonatology and perinatology · 2026Review
- Retrospective Evaluation of Transvaginal Sonography, Saline Infusion Sonography, and Hysterosalpingography for Detecting Endometrial Polyps in 256 Infertile Women.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
- Evaluation of clinical usability and reproducibility of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine Müllerian Anomalies Classification.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2025Article
- Comparative Analysis of Hysterosalpingography and Diagnostic Hysteroscopy Findings in Infertility Evaluation.Cureus · 2025Article
- Analysis of ultrasonic imaging changes and factors related to malignant transformation in postmenopausal patients with endometrial polyps.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Uterine cavity pathology may affect the endometrium or myometrium, resulting in distortion of the uterine cavity, and is responsible for 2%-5% of infertility. The methods for its assessment usually involve imaging modalities like pelvic ultrasonography, often transvaginal-(TVS), and hysterosalpingography-(HSG), with hysteroscopy-(HSC) as the gold standard. However, HSC is not readily available in resource-poor-settings. Purpose: To determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of TVS and HSG in detecting uterine cavity pathology using HSC as a gold standard. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional analytical study of consenting infertile women for evaluation of the uterine cavity using transvaginal-ultrasonography, hysterosalpingogram, and hysteroscopy. The primary-outcome-measures were the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of TVS and HSG in detecting uterine cavity abnormalities using HSG as the gold standard. Results: Eighty-eight participants were analysed for this study. The lesions confirmed on HSC were intrauterine-adhesions (43.1%), endometrial polyps (14.8%), submucous fibroids (18.2%), intrauterine-septum (13.6%), and cavity distortion (14.8%). The overall sensitivity with TVS was 57.7%, with a specificity of 97.6%, a positive-predictive-value (PPV) of 88.2%, and a negative-predictive-value (NPV) of 88.2%, giving a percentage-accuracy of 88.2%. In comparison, HSG had a sensitivity of 72.1%, a specificity of 99.4%, a PPV of 97.4%, and an NPV of 92.0%, giving an overall accuracy of 92.9%. The detection rates of TVS and HSG in this category were: fibroids (97.7% vs 89.8%; Conclusion: HSG appears to be the superior modality for detection of obliterative uterine cavity pathologies, while TVS is better suited for myometrium and endometrial lesions.
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.