1Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, IR Iran
2Trauma Nursing Research Center, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, IR Iran
Background Tubal occlusion is one of the most frequent causes of infertility in women. The evaluation of the fallopian tube is necessary to determine the management plan for infertility. The two most important diagnostic procedures which are used for the evaluation of tubal patency are hysterosalpingography (HSG) and laparoscopy. Objectives The aim of this study was to compare HSG and laparoscopic findings in the diagnosis of tubal patency. Patients and Methods In a prospective study sixty two infertile cases were examined by HSG as part of their routine infertility evaluation, three months after HSG, tubs status were assessed by laparoscopy as a gold standard method. The findings of HSG and laparoscopy were compared. The Laparoscopy findings were used as reference standard to calculate sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for unilateral and bilateral no tubal patency. Results The sensitivity and specificity of HSG on bilateral tubal patency or no bilateral tubal patency were 92.1% and 85.7% respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 97.2% and 66.7%, and the accuracy was 91.1%. The sensitivity and specificity of HSG for evaluation of the bilateral tubal patency and unilateral or bilateral no tubal patency were 77.8% and 52.94%, the positive and negative predictive values were 81.4% and 47.4% respectively, and the accuracy was 71%. Conclusion HSG is considered to have a high sensitivity and specificity. HSG and laparoscopy are not alternative, but are the complementary methods in the examination of no tubal patency.