Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginal ultrasonography and hysterosalpingography in the detection of uterine cavity pathologies among infertile women.

Background: Uterine cavity pathology may affect the endometrium or myometrium, resulting in distortion of the uterine cavity, and is responsible for 2%–5% of infertility. The methods for its assessment usually involve imaging modalities like pelvic ultrasonography, often transvaginal-(TVS), and hysterosalpingography-(HSG), with hysteroscopy-(HSC) as the gold standard. However, HSC is not readily available in resource-poor-settings. Purpose: To determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of TVS and HSG in detecting uterine cavity pathology using HSC as a gold standard. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional analytical study of consenting infertile women for evaluation of the uterine cavity using transvaginal-ultrasonography, hysterosalpingogram, and hysteroscopy. The primary-outcome-measures were the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of TVS and HSG in detecting uterine cavity abnormalities using HSG as the gold standard. Results: Eighty-eight participants were analysed for this study. The lesions confirmed on HSC were intrauterine-adhesions (43.1%), endometrial polyps (14.8%), submucous fibroids (18.2%), intrauterine-septum (13.6%), and cavity distortion (14.8%). The overall sensitivity with TVS was 57.7%, with a specificity of 97.6%, a positive-predictive-value (PPV) of 88.2%, and a negative-predictive-value (NPV) of 88.2%, giving a percentage-accuracy of 88.2%. In comparison, HSG had a sensitivity of 72.1%, a specificity of 99.4%, a PPV of 97.4%, and an NPV of 92.0%, giving an overall accuracy of 92.9%. The detection rates of TVS and HSG in this category were: fibroids (97.7% vs 89.8%; p =.0004) and adhesions (73.9% vs 87.5%; p =.0002), respectively. Conclusion: HSG appears to be the superior modality for detection of obliterative uterine cavity pathologies, while TVS is better suited for myometrium and endometrial lesions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]