Is Diagnostic Curettage Harmful in Women with Unexplained Infertility?

Patrick J. Taylor, GORDON GRAHAM
In: Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 1983 · vol. 38(2) , pp. 112–113 · doi:10.1097/00006254-198302000-00017 · W2003471051
Observational OA: closed CC0
Full text JSON View on OpenAlex View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-09-08 ⓘ

Among women with unexplained primary infertility, diagnostic curettage was associated with a significantly higher incidence of chronic pelvic inflammatory changes compared to those who did not undergo the procedure.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-09-29 · read from full text ⓘ

This study investigated whether diagnostic curettage performed for unexplained infertility increases the risk of tubal damage by comparing laparoscopic findings in women with and without prior procedures. Researchers analyzed 195 patients, categorizing them into a group that had not undergone curettage and a group that had, specifically looking for signs of chronic pelvic inflammatory changes such as adhesions or hydrosalpinx. The results indicated a significantly higher incidence of pelvic inflammatory changes in the group that had previously undergone curettage, while the prevalence of endometriosis did not differ significantly between the two cohorts. Relevance to endometriosis: endometriosis is mentioned only as a control variable with no significant difference found, making the paper tangentially related to endometriosis research rather than centrally focused on it.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

The apparently simple procedure of diagnostic curettage is a mainstay in the armamentarium of many gynecologists in their investigation of infertility. The present study was designed to determine whether diagnostic curettage used in this way might carry any risk of causing tubal damage. One hundred and ninety-five women with otherwise unexplained primary infertility were studied by combined laparoscopy and hysteroscopy. One hundred and forty-two had not undergone diagnostic curettage (group A); 53 had undergone dilatation and curettage elsewhere, specifically as part of an infertility investigation (group B). The findings at laparoscopy with respect to the tubal and peritubal architecture were recorded on a standard protocol. A diagnosis of pelvic inflammatory disease was made if one or more of the following were observed: bilateral or unilateral peritubal and/or periovarian adhesions; bilateral or unilateral hydrosalpinx formation; bilateral tubal phimosis (defined as agglutination of the fimbria with delayed dye transit); bilateral failure of dye to pass the tubo-cornual junctions. Confirmation by hysterosal-pingography was obtained for the seven patients in whom the latter was detected. All procedures were successfully completed, and there were no complications. The findings at pelvic laparoscopy are shown in Table 1. The nature of the laparoscopically detected chronic pelvic inflammatory changes is shown in Table 2. The incidence of pelvic inflammatory changes was significantly greater in the curetted group (P 0.5).
Full text 1,753 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Is Diagnostic Curettage Harmful in Women with Unexplained Infertility? - PATRICK J. TAYLOR - GORDON GRAHAM The apparently simple procedure of diagnostic curettage is a mainstay in the armamentarium of many gynecologists in their investigation of infertility. The present study was designed to determine whether diagnostic curettage used in this way might carry any risk of causing tubal damage. One hundred and ninety-five women with otherwise unexplained primary infertility were studied by combined laparoscopy and hysteroscopy. One hundred and forty-two had not undergone diagnostic curettage (group A); 53 had undergone dilatation and curettage elsewhere, specifically as part of an infertility investigation (group B). The findings at laparoscopy with respect to the tubal and peritubal architecture were recorded on a standard protocol. A diagnosis of pelvic inflammatory disease was made if one or more of the following were observed: bilateral or unilateral peritubal and/or periovarian adhesions; bilateral or unilateral hydrosalpinx formation; bilateral tubal phimosis (defined as agglutination of the fimbria with delayed dye transit); bilateral failure of dye to pass the tubo-cornual junctions. Confirmation by hysterosal-pingography was obtained for the seven patients in whom the latter was detected. All procedures were successfully completed, and there were no complications. The findings at pelvic laparoscopy are shown in Table 1. The nature of the laparoscopically detected chronic pelvic inflammatory changes is shown in Table 2. The incidence of pelvic inflammatory changes was significantly greater in the curetted group (P 0.5).

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

⚙ Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback ⓘ

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Condition tags

endometriosisinfertility

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-04T00:00:01.174412+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK