ArticleCureus2025
Comparative Analysis of Hysterosalpingography and Diagnostic Hysteroscopy Findings in Infertility Evaluation.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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.
- Article
- Intravasation is not only a complication but also a radiological finding for tubal pathologies in hysterosalpingography.The British journal of radiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Infertility affects most of the women of reproductive age, with uterine and tubal factors contributing significantly. Hysterosalpingography (HSG) and diagnostic hysteroscopy are widely used modalities in infertility evaluation. This study compares the findings of HSG and hysteroscopy to assess their diagnostic accuracy and utility in clinical management. Materials and methods A retrospective comparative observational study was conducted at Adichunchungiri Hospital, Karnataka, over six months (April-September 2024). Thirty-nine women aged 23-36 years with primary or secondary infertility underwent both HSG and diagnostic hysteroscopy. HSG assessed tubal patency and gross uterine abnormalities, while hysteroscopy provided direct visualization of intrauterine pathologies. Statistical analysis included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), with hysteroscopy considered the gold standard for intrauterine pathology. Results Bilateral tubal patency was observed in 59% of cases on both HSG and hysteroscopy. HSG demonstrated a sensitivity of 95.83% and specificity of 92.31% for tubal patency. However, hysteroscopy detected additional findings like hydrosalpinx (10.26%), fimbrial cysts (5.13%), and uterine adhesions (7.69%), which were missed by HSG. For uterine abnormalities, HSG had a sensitivity of 70% and specificity of 85.71%, while hysteroscopy provided superior detection of fibroids and septate uterus. Notably, hysteroscopy influenced management decisions, guiding surgical interventions or assisted reproductive techniques in selected cases. Conclusion While HSG remains effective for screening tubal patency, diagnostic hysteroscopy offers superior detection of intrauterine pathologies, impacting treatment strategies. Combining both modalities enhances diagnostic accuracy in infertility evaluation.
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.