Tubal Patency: Hysterosalpingography Compared With Laparoscopy
article
OA: closed
CC0
⤵ 2 in-corpus citations
AI-generated summary
This study compared hysterosalpingography (HSG) with laparoscopy for tubal patency in 121 infertile patients, finding HSG had a 19% false-negative and 7.4% false-positive rate for tubal obstruction.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
Laparoscopy was done about three months after hysterosalpingography (HSG) in 121 patients complaining of infertility. Normal patency was found with both technics in 71 patients (58.6%). In 23 of the 97 patients with a normal HSG, however, peritubal or tubal disease was observed at the time of laparoscopy (false-negative results, 19%). Twenty-four tubal obstructions (19.8%) were detected by HSG (16 distal and eight proximal) but five distal and four proximal obstructions were not confirmed by laparoscopy (false-positive results, 7.4%). In addition, laparoscopic evaluation demonstrated endometriosis in 31 cases, polycystic ovaries in six, and uterine fibroids in five.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Condition tags
MeSH descriptors
Citation neighborhood (sparse)
Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.
Cited by (1)
Cited by (1)
Source provenance
- europepmc
- last seen: 2026-09-18T06:10:57.818014+00:00
- openalex
- last seen: 2026-06-04T00:00:01.174412+00:00
- pubmed
- last seen: 2026-05-14T05:58:53.789372+00:00
- unpaywall
- last seen: 2026-09-18T06:25:56.777850+00:00
License: CC0
· commercial use OK