Comparison of hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy in the evaluation of infertile women

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorSakar, Mehmet N.
dc.contributor.authorGul, Talip
dc.contributor.authorAtay, Ahmet E.
dc.contributor.authorCelik, Yusuf
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-24T17:33:22Z
dc.date.available2024-04-24T17:33:22Z
dc.date.issued2008
dc.departmentDicle Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: To compare tuboperitoneal factors of infertile women by hysterosalpingography (HSG) and laparoscopy. Methods: In this cohort study, 82 infertile cases were evaluated retrospectively by laparoscopy, 3 months subsequent to HSG in the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical School of Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey, between March 2004 and April 2006. The findings of HSG and laparoscopy were compared. Results: Out of the 82 infertile women, pathological findings were observed in 45.1% by HSG, and 54.9% had no pathological finding. On laparoscopic evaluation, however, pathological findings were observed in 65.85%, and 34.15% had no pathological findings. The pathological findings were detected by laparoscopy in 20 of the 45(44.4%) patients who had no pathological findings by HSG, and no pathological findings were detected by laparoscopy in 3 of the 37 (8.1%) patients who had pathological findings by HSG. Laparoscopy revealed no pathological findings in 6 of the 35 patients who had tubal pathology by HSG. The sensitivity of HSG was 63%, specificity was 89.3%, and the positive predictive value was 92%, with a 55% predictive value, and the accuracy ratio was 72%. Conclusion: Laparoscopy is a superior method for the research of tubal and pelvic pathologies in the evaluation of infertility. However, HSG is a more economical and elementary method suitable for evaluation of endometrial and tubal pathologies, and laparoscopy is an appropriate method for examining the external part of tubae, fimbriae, the relation of tuba and ovary, endometriosis, adhesions, tuberculosis, and other pathologies. Therefore, these 2 methods are not alternative, but complementary.en_US
dc.identifier.endpage1318en_US
dc.identifier.issn0379-5284
dc.identifier.issue9en_US
dc.identifier.pmid18813419
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-58049102161
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.startpage1315en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11468/20651
dc.identifier.volume29en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000261031900018
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSaudi Med Jen_US
dc.relation.ispartofSaudi Medical Journal
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subject[No Keyword]en_US
dc.titleComparison of hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy in the evaluation of infertile womenen_US
dc.titleComparison of hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy in the evaluation of infertile women
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu