Diagnostic accuracy of sonohysterography, hysterosalpingography and diagnostic hysteroscopy in diagnosis of arcuate, septate and bicornuate uterus

被引:42
作者
Ludwin, Artur [1 ]
Ludwin, Inga [1 ]
Banas, Tomasz [1 ]
Knafel, Anna [1 ]
Miedzyblocki, Margaret [1 ]
Basta, Antoni [1 ]
机构
[1] Jagiellonian Univ, Dept Gynecol & Oncol, PL-31501 Krakow, Poland
关键词
hysterosalpingography; hysteroscopy; sonohysterography; uterine septum; uterus arcuate; uterus bicornuate; CONGENITAL UTERINE ANOMALIES; TRANSVAGINAL SONOGRAPHY; CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS; METROPLASTY; WOMEN; MALFORMATIONS; MANAGEMENT; SEPTUM;
D O I
10.1111/j.1447-0756.2010.01304.x
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Aim: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of sonohysterography (SHG), hysterosalpingography (HSG) and diagnostic hysteroscopy (DH) in uterine anomaly detection and to assess the role of these various modalities in the differential diagnosis of arcuate, septate and bicornuate uteri. Methods: Eighty-three women, with a history of recurrent spontaneous abortions or infertility and initial diagnosis of uterine anomaly were included in the study. Diagnostic work-up comprised of SHG, HSG and DH. To assess the accuracy of these methods all the patients underwent hysterolaparoscopy to establish the final diagnosis. The correlation between the results of each method was evaluated and diagnostic accuracy of each method was assessed in the whole group of women as well as in subgroups of arcuate, septate and bicornuate uteri using receiver operator curve (ROC) method by estimating the area under the curve (AUC). Results: In the overall diagnosis of uterine anomalies, SHG with accuracy of 95.2% and correlation index of 0.873 (P < 0.001) proved to be a significantly better tool compared to DH (SHG(AUC) = 0.924 versus DHAUC = 0.761 P = 0.008), while no significant differences were observed between SHG versus HSG and DH versus HSG. SHG showed significantly higher accuracy (100.0%) compared to DH (80.7%) and HSG (80.7%) in differentiation of a septate (SHG(AUC) = 1.000 versus DHAUC = 0.816 P < 0.001 and SHG(AUC) = 1.000 versus HSG(ACC) = 0.818; P < 0.001) and bicornuate uterus (SGH(AUC) = 1.000 versus DHACC = 0.707; P < 0.001 and SHG(ACC) = 1.000 versus HSG(AUC) = 0.790; P = 0.002). Conclusion: SHG is a noninvasive, cost-effective method available in an outpatient setting that is highly accurate in identifying uterine anomalies, in particular septate and bicornuate uterus.
引用
收藏
页码:178 / 186
页数:9
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
Acien P, 1997, HUM REPROD, V12, P1372
[2]   Differential diagnosis of septate and bicornuate uterus by sonohysterography eliminates the need for laparoscopy [J].
Alborzi, S ;
Dehbashi, S ;
Parsanezhad, ME .
FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2002, 78 (01) :176-178
[4]   Office hysteroscopic metroplasty: Three "diagnostic criteria" to differentiate between septate and bicornuate uteri [J].
Bettocchi, Stefano ;
Ceci, Oronzo ;
Nappi, Luigi ;
Pontrelli, Giovanni ;
Pinto, Lauro ;
Vicino, Mario .
JOURNAL OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE GYNECOLOGY, 2007, 14 (03) :324-328
[5]   Is hysterosalpingography able to diagnose all uterine malformations correctly? A retrospective study [J].
Braun, P ;
Grau, FV ;
Pons, RM ;
Enguix, DP .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2005, 53 (02) :274-279
[6]   MULLERIAN ANOMALIES - PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION - (ANALYSIS OF 144 CASES) [J].
BUTTRAM, VC ;
GIBBONS, WE .
FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 1979, 32 (01) :40-46
[7]   HYSTEROSCOPIC INCISION OF THE SEPTATE UTERUS - SCISSORS VERSUS RESECTOSCOPE [J].
CARARACH, M ;
PENELLA, J ;
UBEDA, A ;
LABASTIDA, R .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 1994, 9 (01) :87-89
[8]   Imaging of congenital uterine anomalies: review and self-assessment module [J].
Dykes, Thomas M. ;
Siegel, Cary ;
Dodsonl, William .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2007, 189 (03) :S1-S10
[9]   INTRAUTERINE SURGICAL PROCEDURES DURING HYSTEROSCOPY [J].
EDSTROM, KGB .
ENDOSCOPY, 1974, 6 (03) :175-181
[10]   REPRODUCTIVE OUTCOME FOLLOWING HYSTEROSCOPIC MANAGEMENT OF INTRAUTERINE SEPTUM AND ADHESIONS [J].
GOLDENBERG, M ;
SIVAN, E ;
SHARABI, Z ;
MASHIACH, S ;
LIPITZ, S ;
SEIDMAN, DS .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 1995, 10 (10) :2663-2665