Elisabeth Gerard Cassiman , Sophie Harter , Romane Mougel , Cécile Mezan De Malartic , Charline Bertholdt , Olivier Morel , Mikaël Agopiantz
{"title":"HyFosy 是评估输卵管通畅性的新黄金标准吗?系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Elisabeth Gerard Cassiman , Sophie Harter , Romane Mougel , Cécile Mezan De Malartic , Charline Bertholdt , Olivier Morel , Mikaël Agopiantz","doi":"10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The aim of this study was to compare hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFosy) with other tubal patency tests to analyse its efficacy, safety and tolerance. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following the Cochrane Collaboration and PRISMA guidelines by searching PubMed and the Cochrane Library using the term ‘HyFosy’. In total, 20 studies, published from 2012 to January 2023, were included in this review. Information about the identification of tubal patency, agreement with laparoscopy, pain intensity, procedure failure, occurrence of pregnancy, side effects and treatment modalities was extracted. In 94% of patients, HyFosy had the same result as laparoscopy. No difference was found between HyFosy and hysterosalpingography (HSG) in terms of identification of tubal patency [total risk ratio (TRR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.88–1.10] and procedure failure (TRR 0.47, 95% CI 0.07–3.05). The visual analogue scale pain score was in favour of HyFosy (TRR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00–1.17); 95% of patients scored <6. Only 1% of patients had procedure failure or side effects after undergoing HyFosy. HyFosy is at least as efficient as HSG. HyFosy should be fully integrated as a first-line tool for the assessment of tubal patency. New guidelines for the inclusion of HyFosy in the assessment of tubal patency and standardization of this new procedure are essential.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":21134,"journal":{"name":"Reproductive biomedicine online","volume":"50 1","pages":"Article 104380"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is hysterosalpingo-foam sonography the new gold standard for assessing tubal patency? A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Elisabeth Gerard Cassiman , Sophie Harter , Romane Mougel , Cécile Mezan De Malartic , Charline Bertholdt , Olivier Morel , Mikaël Agopiantz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rbmo.2024.104380\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The aim of this study was to compare hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFosy) with other tubal patency tests to analyse its efficacy, safety and tolerance. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following the Cochrane Collaboration and PRISMA guidelines by searching PubMed and the Cochrane Library using the term ‘HyFosy’. In total, 20 studies, published from 2012 to January 2023, were included in this review. Information about the identification of tubal patency, agreement with laparoscopy, pain intensity, procedure failure, occurrence of pregnancy, side effects and treatment modalities was extracted. In 94% of patients, HyFosy had the same result as laparoscopy. No difference was found between HyFosy and hysterosalpingography (HSG) in terms of identification of tubal patency [total risk ratio (TRR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.88–1.10] and procedure failure (TRR 0.47, 95% CI 0.07–3.05). The visual analogue scale pain score was in favour of HyFosy (TRR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00–1.17); 95% of patients scored <6. Only 1% of patients had procedure failure or side effects after undergoing HyFosy. HyFosy is at least as efficient as HSG. HyFosy should be fully integrated as a first-line tool for the assessment of tubal patency. New guidelines for the inclusion of HyFosy in the assessment of tubal patency and standardization of this new procedure are essential.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21134,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reproductive biomedicine online\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 104380\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reproductive biomedicine online\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472648324005698\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reproductive biomedicine online","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472648324005698","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Is hysterosalpingo-foam sonography the new gold standard for assessing tubal patency? A systematic review and meta-analysis
The aim of this study was to compare hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFosy) with other tubal patency tests to analyse its efficacy, safety and tolerance. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following the Cochrane Collaboration and PRISMA guidelines by searching PubMed and the Cochrane Library using the term ‘HyFosy’. In total, 20 studies, published from 2012 to January 2023, were included in this review. Information about the identification of tubal patency, agreement with laparoscopy, pain intensity, procedure failure, occurrence of pregnancy, side effects and treatment modalities was extracted. In 94% of patients, HyFosy had the same result as laparoscopy. No difference was found between HyFosy and hysterosalpingography (HSG) in terms of identification of tubal patency [total risk ratio (TRR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.88–1.10] and procedure failure (TRR 0.47, 95% CI 0.07–3.05). The visual analogue scale pain score was in favour of HyFosy (TRR 1.09, 95% CI 1.00–1.17); 95% of patients scored <6. Only 1% of patients had procedure failure or side effects after undergoing HyFosy. HyFosy is at least as efficient as HSG. HyFosy should be fully integrated as a first-line tool for the assessment of tubal patency. New guidelines for the inclusion of HyFosy in the assessment of tubal patency and standardization of this new procedure are essential.
期刊介绍:
Reproductive BioMedicine Online covers the formation, growth and differentiation of the human embryo. It is intended to bring to public attention new research on biological and clinical research on human reproduction and the human embryo including relevant studies on animals. It is published by a group of scientists and clinicians working in these fields of study. Its audience comprises researchers, clinicians, practitioners, academics and patients.
Context:
The period of human embryonic growth covered is between the formation of the primordial germ cells in the fetus until mid-pregnancy. High quality research on lower animals is included if it helps to clarify the human situation. Studies progressing to birth and later are published if they have a direct bearing on events in the earlier stages of pregnancy.