ArticleThe British journal of radiology2025
Intravasation is not only a complication but also a radiological finding for tubal pathologies in hysterosalpingography.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Interobserver Agreement Between Artificial Intelligence, Radiologist, and Gynecologist in Hysterosalpingography Interpretation: A Retrospective Comparative Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesHysterosalpingography (HSG) remains the first-line imaging technique for assessing fallopian tube conditions due to its accessibility, cost-effectiveness, and high diagnostic accuracy. Intravasation, the leakage of contrast media into myometrial or vascular structures during HSG, has been documented as a complication. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of intravasation, explore the relationship between intravasation and tubal occlusion, and assess the applicability of grading intravasation.
methodsA retrospective analysis of 3032 HSG examinations performed between January 2021 and May 2024 was conducted. Intravasation, tubal occlusion, and related findings were recorded using standard X-ray equipment and categorized prospectively. Statistical analysis included logistic regression to identify predictors of tubal occlusion and inter-observer agreement using Fleiss Kappa. Diagnostic metrics for intravasation as a radiological marker of tubal occlusion were calculated.
resultsIntravasation was observed in 2.6% of cases. Among cases with tubal occlusion, 16.4% exhibited intravasation. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of intravasation for detecting tubal occlusion were 14.5%, 99.8%, 92.3%, and 85.6%, respectively. Adjusted odds ratios indicated that intravasation increased the likelihood of tubal occlusion approximately 55-fold. Inter-observer agreement for intravasation detection was almost perfect (Kappa = 0.97). Limitations included the absence of oil-based contrast and a pressure manometer during contrast infusion.
conclusionsIntravasation, traditionally viewed as a complication, emerges as a significant radiological indicator of tubal occlusion. Incorporating intravasation characteristics, such as initiation time, into grading systems may enhance diagnostic accuracy. Further refinement of classification systems and broader clinical validation are recommended. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: About 92.3% of tubes with intravasation were occluded and the site of intravasation correlated with the occlusion site. Occlusion was 55× more likely in cases with intravasation, traditionally viewed as a complication, emerges as a significant radiological indicator of tubal occlusion.
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.