Published: 2016-12-15

Comparative study of sonosalpingography versus hysterosalpingography for tubal patency test

Nitin N. Kulkarni, Richa Patel, Nilay R. Patel, Alka B. Patil


Background: Various tubal pathologies accounts for 10% aetiological factors in infertility couples. Easy availability and accessibility of ultrasonography definitely can prove superior to conventional method of diagnosis of tubal patency in such patient. Aims and objectives of the study were to test the sensitivity and specificity of sonosalpingography (SSG) for tubal patency test in cases of infertility patients attending to our OPD and to compare the result of sonosalpingography v/s HSG.

Methods: In a non randomised prospective control trial of 50 women complaining of infertility, suspected tubal pathologies underwent various radiological modalities. Sonosalpingography and hysterosalpingography was performed in all cases.

Results: By using binomial proportion test there is no significant difference between results of SSG compare to HSG. Acceptability was 100% in SSG compared to 96% in HSG.

Conclusions: Various modalities are suggested to evaluate tubal patency test in infertile women. Among those laparoscopic chromopertubation is gold standard method, but for initial workup as cost effectiveness acceptability, accessibility is concerned SSG is always superior to HSG.



Full Text:



Richman TS, Visconi GN, Decherney A, Polan ML Alcebo LO. Fallopian tubal patency assessed by ultrasound following fluid injection. Radiology. 1984;152:507-10.

Randolph JR, Ying YK, Maier DB, Schmidt CL, Riddick DH. Comparison of real time ultrasonography, hysterosalpingography, and laparoscopy/hysteroscopy in the evaluation of uterine abnormalities and tubal patency. Fertil Steril. 1986;47:828-32.

Tufekei EC, Girit S. Bayirli E, Durmusoglue E, Yalti S. Evaluation of tubal patency by transvaginal sonosalpingography. Fertil Steril. 1992:57:336-40.

Volpi E, Piermatteo M, Zuccaro G, Baisi F, Sismondi P. The role of transvaginal sonosalpingography in the evaluation of tubal patency. Minerva Ginecol. 1996;48(1-2):1-3.

Heikkinen H, Tekay A, Volpi E, Martikainen H, Jouppila P. Transvaginal salpingography for the assessment of tubal patency in infertile women: methodological and clinical experiences. Fertil Steril. 1995;64:293-8.

Volpi E, Zuccaro G, Patriarca A, Rustichelli S, Sismondi P. Transvaginal sonographic tubal patency testing using air and saline as contrast media in a routine clinic setting. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1996;7:34-8.

Spalding H, Tekay A, Martikainen H, Jouppila P. Assessment of tubal patency with transvaginal salpingosonography after treatment for tubal pregnancy. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:306-9.

Inki P, Palo P, Anttila L. Vaginal sonosalpingography in the evaluation of tubal patency. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1998;77(10):978-82.

Sharma RP. Fallopian tube patency by ultrasound scans J Obstet Gynecol India. 1989;39:700-01.

Randolph JR, Ying YK, Maier DB. Comparison of real-time ultrasonography, hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy/hysteroscopy in the evaluation of uterine abnormalities and tubal patency. Fertil Steril. 1986;46:828-32.

Nannini R, Chelo E, Branconi F, Tantini C, Scarselli GF. Dynamic echohysteroscopy: A new diagnostic technique in the study of female infertility. Acta Eur Fertil. 1981;12:16571.

Hill AD. Sonohysterography in the office: instruments and technique. Contemporary OB/GYN Archive. 1997;15.

Parsons AK, Lense JJ. Sonohysterography for endometrial abnormalities: Preliminary results. J Clin Ultrasound. 1993;21:87.

Kore S, Hegde A, Nair S. Sonography for assessment of tubal patency: Our experience. J Obstet Gynecol India. 2000;50:636.

Dijkman AB, Mol BW, van der Veen F, Bossuyt PM, Hogerzeil HV. Can hysterosalpingo contrast sonography replace hysterosalpingo graphy in the assessment of tubal subfertility? Eur J Radiol. 2000;35:448.