Diagnostic role of magnetic resonance hysterosalpingography in the evaluation of female infertility

Abstract

Abstract Background In the evaluation of female infertility, hysterosalpingography (HSG) with fluoroscopy provides limited evaluation of congenital uterine malformation and extrauterine disease. Transvaginal ultrasonography (TVS) is though commonly used, has its limitations in assessment of tubes. Addition of sonosalpingography can help assess tubal patency but may be inconclusive in cases of unilateral or bilateral obstruction and is grossly operator dependent. Recent past has seen evolution of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to evaluate problems associated with female infertility, with unparalleled advantages of having no radiation and being less operator-dependent. The need to assess tubal patency has been addressed by increasing literature on utilization of gadolinium (Gd) in MRI and comparing it with HSG alone or a mixture of HSG and laparoscopy. We aimed to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and magnetic resonance hysterosalpingography (MRHSG) as a screening test for female infertility and to compare accuracy, positive predictive value and efficacy of MRI and MRHSG with laparoscopy. Results Fifty-four out of 63 patients had bilateral tubal patency (85.7%). Nine patients had tubal pathology (14.3%) out of which one had unilateral and eight had bilateral tubal obstruction. Endometrial cavity abnormality was found in four patients and ovarian abnormalities were detected in 28.5% patients. MRHSG has shown high sensitivity and specificity for tubal patency evaluation when compared to the true gold standard for tubal patency assessment, laparoscopic chromotubation. With laparoscopy as standard, there was 100% sensitivity and specificity for structural abnormality, myometrial abnormalities and endometrial cavity assessment in MRHSG. Conclusions In comparison with diagnostic laparoscopy, MRHSG was found to have good sensitivity and specificity for assessment of tubal patency, excellent sensitivity and specificity for the assessment of structural malformation and endometrial cavity lesions. Furthermore MRHSG was good in picking up extra-uterine diseases.