Comparison of HyFoSy, HyCoSy and X-Ray Hysterosalpingography in the Assessment of Tubal Patency in Women with Infertility: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Tubal dysfunction may be a contributing factor in up to 35% of infertility cases, rendering tubal patency assessment a vital component of the infertility workup. In this review we examined the diagnostic efficacy and tolerability of hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) and compared it to hysterosalpingography (HSG) and hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography (HyCoSy). Methods: Online databases were systematically searched and evaluated according to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed. Diagnostic sensitivity, specificity and inter-method agreement were evaluated, along with mean pain scores. Results: This analysis included data from 9 studies and 1354 patients with conclusive diagnostic data from 2422 tubes and 1294 patients with data on intra-procedural pain. With regard to HyFoSy and HyCoSy comparison, pooled sensitivity was 87% and 69%, respectively (p = 0.074), while pooled specificity was 95% and 85%, respectively, favoring HyFoSy (p < 0.001). HyFoSy was more tolerable with regard to pain, but this was not statistically significant. Regarding the HyFoSy and HSG comparison, pooled Cohen's k was 0.38, indicating fair-moderate agreement. In subsequent analysis, with HSG as a reference standard, HyFoSy demonstrated low sensitivity (61%) but high specificity (87%). With regard to experienced pain, HyFoSy and HSG had a difference of 2.4 units on a 10-point scale, favoring HyFoSy (p < 0.001). Conclusions: HyFoSy was superior to HyCoSy and may be used as a first-line tubal assessment method, with HSG being utilized in inconclusive cases. However, further research is still required due to the small number of available studies.