Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rimbach, S.
Right arrow Articles by Bastert, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rimbach, S.
Right arrow Articles by Bastert, G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 11, No. 10, pp. 2130-2133, 1996
© 1996 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

research-article

Infertility: Comparison of in-vitro falloposcopy with tubal histology in the diagnosis of Fallopian tube pathology

S. Rimbach1, D. Wallwiener, C. Barth, D. Heberling and G. Bastert

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vosstrasse 9, University of Heidelberg D-69115 Heidelberg, Germany

Correspondence: 1To whom correspondence should be addressed

In order to assess the diagnostic quality of falloposcopy in relation to pathomorphology, a consecutive series of 30 Fallopian tubes obtained from surgical salpingectomy cases were prospectively examined by in-vitro falloposcopy and histology. Falloposcopy was performed using an over-the-wire catheterization system and a 0.5 mm falloposcope with 3000 pixels. Assessment of the specimens included the description of lumen geometry, intraluminal changes and status of the mucosal surface. Falloposcopy classified 14 tubes as normal and 16 pathological. Histology resulted in 17 normal versus 13 pathological tubes. Pathologies included lumen obstructions and dilatations, intraluminal synechiae and mucosal damage. Sensitivity and specificity of falloposcopy were calculated to be 0.85 and 0.71; positive and negative predictive values were 0.69 and 0.86. It was concluded that falloposcopic findings indeed reflect and successfully differentiate normal and pathological conditions allowing adequate and reproducible image interpretation. However, variations of the diagnostic accuracy with the type of pathology and the tubal segment have to be taken into account before clinical consequences are drawn from a falloposcopic investigation.

Key words: falloposcopy/infertility/reproductive surgery/tubal endoscopy


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
A. Shushan and N. Rojansky
Should hysteroscopy be a part of the basic infertility workup?
Hum. Reprod., August 1, 1999; 14(8): 1923 - 1924.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.