Three-dimensional Transvaginal Ultrasound vs Office Hysteroscopy for Assessment of Uterine Cavity in Assisted Reproductive Program

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction The success of an assisted reproductive program (ARP) depends on the embryo quality and the intrauterine environment. It has been reported up until now that abnormal uterine findings occur in nearly 34 to 62% of infertile women worldwide. Due to this reason, uterine cavity evaluation is commonly recommended to screen for fibroids, polyps, adhesions, and mullerian abnormalities. Uterine cavity evaluation is usually accomplished with three-dimensional (3D) transvaginal ultrasound (TVS), sonohysterography, hysterosalpingography, and office hysteroscopy (OH). Materials and methods Uterine cavity evaluation was carried out in 239 infertile females undergoing ARP with twodimensional (2D) followed by 3D vaginal ultrasonography on day 21 of their menstrual cycles. Later, OH was carried out on 5th or 6th day of menstrual cycles. Results Out of 239 women, 3D TVS was abnormal in 28 (11.71%) and OH was abnormal in 53 (22.17%). Three-dimensional TVS agreed with OH in 16 (30.18%) abnormal cases and 179 (93.71%) normal cases. False-positive results for 3D TVS were 12 (6.28%) and false-negative results were 37 (69.81%). In our study, sensitivity of 3D TVS was 30.1%, specificity was 93.7%, positive predictive value was 57.1%, and negative predictive value was 82.8%. Conclusion Office hysteroscopy is an easy and safe procedure and has a better diagnostic efficacy than 3D TVS for uterine cavity evaluation in women undergoing ARP. How to cite this article Mishra VV, Patel U, Gandhi K. Threedimensional Transvaginal Ultrasound vs Office Hysteroscopy for Assessment of Uterine Cavity in Assisted Reproductive Program. J South Asian Feder Obst Gynae 2016;8(4):290-293.