Fertility and sterility · 1995
The accuracy of hysterosalpingography in the diagnosis of tubal pathology: a meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Swart P, Mol B W, van der Veen F, van Beurden M, Redekop W K, Bossuyt P M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To assess the value of hysterosalpingography (HSG) in diagnosing tubal patency and peritubal adhesions using laparoscopy with chromopertubation as the gold standard.
DESIGN: Meta-analysis of 20 studies comparing HSG and laparoscopy for tubal patency and peritubal adhesions.
PATIENTS: Four thousand one hundred seventy-nine patients with infertility in 20 studies.
INTERVENTION: Hysterosalpingography and diagnostic laparoscopy as part of infertility workup.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Tubal patency and peritubal adhesions.
RESULTS: For tubal patency the reported sensitivity and specificity differed between studies. In a subset of studies that evaluated HSG and laparoscopy independently, a point estimate of 0.65 for sensitivity and 0.83 for specificity was calculated. For peritubal adhesions a summary receiver operating characteristic curve could be estimated.
CONCLUSIONS: Although HSG is of limited use for detecting tubal patency because of its low sensitivity, its high specificity makes it a useful test for ruling in tubal obstruction. For the evaluation of peritubal adhesions HSG is not reliable.
DESIGN: Meta-analysis of 20 studies comparing HSG and laparoscopy for tubal patency and peritubal adhesions.
PATIENTS: Four thousand one hundred seventy-nine patients with infertility in 20 studies.
INTERVENTION: Hysterosalpingography and diagnostic laparoscopy as part of infertility workup.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Tubal patency and peritubal adhesions.
RESULTS: For tubal patency the reported sensitivity and specificity differed between studies. In a subset of studies that evaluated HSG and laparoscopy independently, a point estimate of 0.65 for sensitivity and 0.83 for specificity was calculated. For peritubal adhesions a summary receiver operating characteristic curve could be estimated.
CONCLUSIONS: Although HSG is of limited use for detecting tubal patency because of its low sensitivity, its high specificity makes it a useful test for ruling in tubal obstruction. For the evaluation of peritubal adhesions HSG is not reliable.