Comparison of hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy in evaluation of female infertility

Main Article Content

Farideh Gharekhanloo Fereshteh Rastegar


Background and Objectives: Laparoscopic surgery (LS) is the most important diagnostic technique for the detection of causes of infertility; however, this method is accompanied by some setbacks. Given the noninvasive nature and cost-effectiveness of hysterosalpingography (HSG), it is widely used as the first-line approach for the evaluation of the patency of the fallopian tubes and uterine anomalies in female infertility. Herein, we aimed to compare the diagnostic values of HSG with LS in the assessment of patency of the fallopian tubes and peritoneal disease in infertile women.

Materials and Methods: This prospective, cross-sectional study was performed on 115 infertile women admitted to the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology in Fatemiyeh Teaching Hospital, Hamedan, Iran, during March 2011- September 2012. Tubal patency, peritubal adhesion, uterine anomalies, and tubo-ovarian abscess (TOA) findings in HSG were compared with laparoscopic findings. Data was analyzed using McNemar's test and Cohen's Kappa.

Results: The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of HSG for the detection of unilateral and bilateral tubal occlusion were 75%, 91.2%, 89.5%, 75%, 97.2%, and 96.6%, respectively. Furthermore, false-positive and false-negative rates of HSG for the detection of unilateral and bilateral tubal occlusion were 8.7% and 25%, respectively. The accuracy of HSG in detecting uterine anomalies and hydrosalpinx were 93.3% and 93.9%, respectively. Peritubal adhesion and TOA were detected in 61% of the cases with normal HSG. In addition, of the nine cases of bilateral tubal occlusion detected by HSG, six cases were confirmed to have bilateral occlusion using laparoscopy. The comparison between HSG and LS techniques showed a significant difference in diagnosis of distal fallopian tube occlusion (P=0.021) and unilateral fallopian tube occlusion (P<0.001) among infertile women. The comparison between HSG and LS techniques demonstrated a significant difference in diagnosis of TOA (P<0.001) and peritubal adhesion (P=0.033).

Conclusion: It seems that the findings of HSG regarding occlusion, hydrosalpinx, and uterine anomalies are reliable. However, due to its low sensitivity in detecting peritubal adhesion, performing LS before initiation of treatment in these patients is necessary to rule out adhesion and to confirm tubal patency.

Article Details

How to Cite
GHAREKHANLOO, Farideh; RASTEGAR, Fereshteh. Comparison of hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy in evaluation of female infertility. Medical Research Archives, [S.l.], v. 5, n. 6, oct. 2017. ISSN 2375-1924. Available at: <>. Date accessed: 29 may 2023. doi:
Laparoscopy, Infertility, Hysterosalpingography, Diagnostic accuracy
Research Articles


1. Reviews C. Anatomy and Physiology for Midwives: Medicine, Internal medicine: Cram101; 2016.
2. Baumann L. Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice, Second Edition: Principles & Practice: McGraw-Hill Education; 2008.
3. Ried K, Stuart K. Efficacy of Traditional Chinese Herbal Medicine in the management of female infertility: a systematic review. Complementary therapies in medicine. 2011;19(6):319-31.
4. Himmel W, Ittner E, Kochen MM, Michelmann HW, Hinney B, Reuter M, et al. Management of involuntary childlessness. Br J Gen Pract. 1997;47(415):111-8.
5. Saunders RD, Shwayder JM, Nakajima ST. Current methods of tubal patency assessment. Fertility and sterility. 2011;95(7):2171-9.
6. Pasic RP, Brill AI, Levine R. A Practical Manual of Laparoscopy and Minimally Invasive Gynecology: A Clinical Cookbook: CRC Press; 2007.
7. Tayebeh N, Fatemeh K, Abbas B. Comparison of chlamydia infection prevalence between patients with and without ectopic pregnancy using the PCR method. Ginekol Pol. 2012;83:819-21.
8. Sakar MN, Gul T, Atay AE, Celik Y. Comparison of hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy in the evaluation of infertile women. Saudi medical journal. 2008;29(9):1315-8.
9. Mol BW, Collins JA, Burrows EA, Van der Veen F, Bossuyt PM. Comparison of hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy in predicting fertility outcome. Human Reproduction. 1999;14(5):1237-42.
10. Tvarijonavičienė E, Nadišauskienė RJ. The value of hysterosalpingography in the diagnosis of tubal pathology among infertile patients. Medicina (Kaunas). 2008;44(6):439-48.
11. Lavy Y, Lev-Sagie A, Holtzer H, Revel A, Hurwitz A. Should laparoscopy be a mandatory component of the infertility evaluation in infertile women with normal hysterosalpingogram or suspected unilateral distal tubal pathology? European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2004;114(1):64-8.
12. Shah S, Towobola O, Masihleho M. Diagnosis of fallopian tube patency. East African medical journal. 2005;82(9).
13. Bosteels J, Van Herendael B, Weyers S, D'hooghe T. The position of diagnostic laparoscopy in current fertility practice. Human reproduction update. 2007;13(5):477-85.
14. Waheed S, Mazhar R, Khan N, Rafi M. The Comparison of Hysterosalpingography and Laparoscopy in Predicting Fertility. Annals of King Edward Medical University. 2007;13(3):202.
15. Perquin D, Dörr P, De Craen A, Helmerhorst F. Routine use of hysterosalpingography prior to laparoscopy in the fertility workup: a multicentre randomized controlled trial. Human Reproduction. 2006;21(5):1227-31.
16. Goynumer G, Yetim G, Gokcen O, Karaaslan I, Wetherilt L, Durukan B. Hysterosalpingography, Laparoscopy or both in the Diagnosis of Tubal Disease in Infertility. 2008.
17. Seyedoshohadaei F, Mohammadbeigi R, Tahmuri A, Ghaderi E. Frequency and related factors of tubal patency after methotrexate treatment in women with ectopic pregnancy. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research. 2016;42(3):286-90.
18. Broeze K, Opmeer B, Van Geloven N, Coppus S, Collins J, Den Hartog J, et al. Are patient characteristics associated with the accuracy of hysterosalpingography in diagnosing tubal pathology? An individual patient data meta-analysis. Human reproduction update. 2010:dmq056.