Timing and Values of Laparoscopy in Infertile Women with Normal Hysterosalpingography

Objective: To verify the current practice of postponing laparoscopy after a normal HSG in infertile couples with no evident cause of infertility, aiming at reducing the need for interventional investigations thus decreasing cost and risk. Study Design: Case series study including three hundred and thirty women. Patients and Methods: The women were categorized into two groups as follows: Group (1): 200 women with normal hysterosalpingography and undergoing laparoscopy for investigating infertility. Group (2): 130 women undergoing hysterosalpingography as part of their infertility workup, with no obvious cause for infertility and scheduled to have diagnostic laparoscopy after 6 months of follow-up. They were studied for at Kasr El Ainy Maternity Hospital from April 2013 to April 2014. Results: By comparing retrospective and prospective groups, it was found that incidence of fallopian tube abnormalities was more in group (2) (55%) than in group (1) (35%) and the incidence of change of diagnosis post operatively is markedly higher in group (2) (75%) than group (1) (42%) this may be due to the presence of follow-up in group (2). Conclusions: In infertile women with normal hysterosalpingography, laparoscopy is better not performed before 6 months after normal hysterosalpingography because of potential therapeutic effect of hysterosalpingography. Also laparoscopy is better to be performed after a normal hysterosalpingography if pregnancy has not occurred by 6 months because of high incidence of pelvic pathology.

[1]  H. Hoshiai,et al.  Benefit of diagnostic laparoscopy for patients with unexplained infertility and normal hysterosalpingography findings. , 2009, The Tohoku journal of experimental medicine.

[2]  B. Opmeer,et al.  The predictive value of medical history taking and Chlamydia IgG ELISA antibody testing (CAT) in the selection of subfertile women for diagnostic laparoscopy: a clinical prediction model approach. , 2007, Human reproduction.

[3]  Y. Taketani,et al.  High incidence of tubal dysfunction is determined by laparoscopy in cases with positiveChlamydia trachomatis antibody despite negative finding in prior hysterosalpingography , 2007, Reproductive medicine and biology.

[4]  L. Pawelczyk,et al.  [Laparoscopic assessment following failure to achieve pregnancy after intrauterine inseminations in patients with normal hysterosalpingograms]. , 2006, Ginekologia polska.

[5]  Anara Kudaiberdieva,et al.  Prediction of laparoscopic surgery outcomes in tubal infertility , 2005, The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology.

[6]  B. Mol,et al.  Evidence-based medicine for diagnostic questions. , 2003, Seminars in reproductive medicine.

[7]  L. Coughlin,et al.  Can diagnostic laparoscopy be avoided in routine investigation for infertility? , 2001, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[8]  H. Martikainen,et al.  A randomized study comparing air to Echovist as a contrast medium in the assessment of tubal patency in infertile women using transvaginal salpingosonography. , 1997, Human reproduction.

[9]  A. Lee,et al.  Hysteroscopy, hysterosalpingography and tubal ostial polyps in infertility patients. , 1997, The Journal of reproductive medicine.

[10]  R. Burslem,et al.  Unexplained infertility. , 1986, British medical journal.

[11]  G. P. Wood.  Laparoscopic Examination of the Normal Infertile Woman , 1983, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[12]  T. Daane,et al.  Unexplained Infertility: A Reappraisal , 1977, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[13]  B. Carr,et al.  Infertile couples with a normal hysterosalpingogram. Reproductive outcome and its relationship to clinical and laparoscopic findings. , 1995, The Journal of reproductive medicine.