Human Reproduction, Vol 13, 1815-1818, Copyright © 1998 by Oxford University Press
H Dechaud, JP Daures and B Hedon
The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of routine
falloposcopy in infertile patients undergoing basic infertility
investigations, and to determine its usefulness in comparison with other
tubal investigation methods. Seventy-five infertile women were selected
based on the following criteria: 2 years of infertility, age between 18 and
40 years, normal ovulation, and partner with normal spermatozoa. Based on
the results of the classical means of tubal evaluation
(hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy), these patients were classified in
one of two groups: tubal or unexplained infertility. All patients underwent
a falloposcopy under general anaesthesia. The procedures were performed by
the same surgeon with the linear everting catheter. Based on the
falloposcopic findings, these patients were then reclassified in one of two
other groups: falloposcopic tubal or falloposcopic unexplained infertility.
The mean outcome measures were catheterization rate, duration of the
procedure, pregnancy rates, complication rate and predictive value of
Falloposcopy. The tubal catheterization rate was 94.5%. The mean duration
of falloposcopy was 19 min per tube. Based on a standard scoring system,
the spontaneous pregnancy rates were 27.6% for a score <20; 11.5% for a
score between 21 and 30; and 0% if the score was >30. Complication rate
was 5.1% of pinpoint perforations of the tube. With Cox's statistical
model, none of the parameters analysed was statistically predictive of
intrauterine pregnancy. We conclude that the greater accuracy of diagnosis
by falloposcopy may indicate that it should be incorporated into the
initial screening of infertile patients.
ARTICLES
Prospective evaluation of falloposcopy
Service de Gynecologie-Obstetrique, CHU Arnaud de Villeneuve, Montpellier, France.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. Rimbach, G. Bastert, and D. Wallwiener Technical results of falloposcopy for infertility diagnosis in a large multicentre study Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2001; 16(5): 925 - 930. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Dechaud Hydrosalpinx and ART: Hydrosalpinges suitable for salpingectomy before IVF Hum. Reprod., December 1, 2000; 15(12): 2464 - 2465. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. Puttemans, R. Campo, S. Gordts, and I. Brosens Hydrosalpinx and ART: Hydrosalpinx - functional surgery or salpingectomy? Hum. Reprod., July 1, 2000; 15(7): 1427 - 1430. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Optimal use of infertility diagnostic tests and treatments Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2000; 15(3): 723 - 732. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
|
|