Comparison of Virtual Ultrasonographic Hysteroscopy with Conventional Hysteroscopy in the Workup of Patients Who Are Infertile.

STUDY OBJECTIVE:To compare the tolerability and diagnostic accuracy of virtual ultrasonographic hysteroscopy (VUH) with that of conventional diagnostic outpatient hysteroscopy in the workup of patients who are infertile. DESIGN:A single-center, retrospective cohort study. SETTING:Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gynecologic Oncology, and Minimally Invasive Pelvic Surgery Unit of Sacred Heart Hospital Don Calabria in Negrar, Italy. PATIENTS:A total of 120 consecutive women who underwent hysterosalpingosonography and subsequent VUH and conventional hysteroscopy for infertility evaluation were included. The inclusion criterion was infertility for at least 1 year, with evaluation in the early or intermediate follicular phase of the menstrual cycle. INTERVENTIONS:After the placement of an intracervical catheter, a Ringer Lactate solution was injected into the uterine cavity and fallopian tubes, and a 3D volume was obtained. The ultrasound volume acquired was successively elaborated offline, and a VUH was performed. Subsequently, a variable amount of air was introduced into the uterine cavity, and the patency of the salpinges was evaluated. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:The VUH findings were compared with those of conventional hysteroscopy performed in the subsequent month. For the detection of endometrial pathology in the overall pool, the sensitivity and specificity of VUH in comparison with conventional hysteroscopy were 100% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84.6%-100%) and 100% (95% CI, 96.3%-100%), respectively. For the detection of uterine cavity pathology and uterine malformations in the overall pool, the sensitivities of VUH were 80% (95% CI, 28.4%-99.5%) and 100% (95% CI, 75.3%-100%), respectively, with specificities of 100% (95% CI, 96.8%-100%) and 100% (95% CI, 96.6%-100%), respectively, when compared with conventional hysteroscopy. The positive predictive values for endometrial pathology, uterine cavity alterations, and uterine malformations were 100% (95% CI, 84.6%-100%), 100% (95% CI, 39.8%-100%), and 100% (95% CI, 75.3%-100%), respectively, with a receiver operating characteristic area of 100%, 90% (95% CI, 70%-100%), and 100%, respectively. There were no cases of severe vasovagal reactions or other complications. Most patients (67%, 81 of 120 women) described the examination as "less painful than expected," 25% (30 of 120 women) "just as expected," and only 7% (9 of 120 women) as "more painful than expected." CONCLUSION:VUH was well tolerated and showed a high accuracy (100%) in the study of the uterine cavity when compared with conventional hysteroscopy.