The diagnostic value of saline infusion sonohysterography in evaluation of patients with abnormal uterine bleeding.
- Author:
Hee Jung CHO
1
;
Kye Hyun NAM
;
Hee Tae KIM
;
Jaeong Sik KIM
;
Soo Ho CHUNG
;
Kwon Hae LEE
;
Jeong Jae LEE
Author Information
1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Soonchunhyang University, Bucheon, Korea. khnam@schbc.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Saline infusion sonohysterography;
Abnormal uterine bleeding
- MeSH:
Endometrium;
Female;
Humans;
Myoma;
Pathology;
Polyps;
Sensitivity and Specificity;
Uterine Hemorrhage*
- From:Korean Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
2006;49(4):882-891
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate saline infusion sonohysterography (SIS) as an investigative modality in abnormal uterine bleeding of premenopausal and postmenopausal women. METHODS: Eighty eight patients, 74 premenopausal women and 14 postmenopausal women, with abnormal uterine bleeding were selected. After complete work-up, transvaginal examination were performed followed by SIS. The final surgical-pathologic findings were compared with the results obtained from transvaginal sonography (TVS) and SIS. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value were calculated for each procedure. RESULTS: The SIS was perfomed in 85 cases. It couldn't be done in one premenopausal woman and two postmenopausal women. The uterine cavity was normal in 28 women, 57 cases displayed abnormalities. Seventeen had endometrial polyp, 17 had submucosal myoma, 23 had irregular endometrium. We found that SIS missed five endometrial polyp and mislabeled 14 (38.9%) false positive endometrial growth. On comparing SIS, transvaginal sonography missed nine endometrial polyp and mislabeled 22 (55%) false positive endometrial growth. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of TVS were 72.9%, 45%, 61.4% and 58.1%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of SIS were 87.8%, 61.1%, 75.4% and 78.6%, respectively. Sensitivtity and negative predictive value were significantly higher with SIS than TVS. CONCLUSION: The SIS is a safe, convenient, time conserving, cost effective, easily accessible and acceptable investigative modality. It definitely enhance the diagnostic potential of TVS in accessment of endometrium and intracavitary pathologies in women with abnormal uterine bleeding.
