Hysterosalpingography with a balloon catheter versus a metal cannula: A prospective, randomized, blinded comparative study

Abstract

A prospective, randomized, blinded study was conducted to compare the use of a balloon catheter for performing hysterosalpingography (HSG) with the use of a traditional metal cannula. Sixty-one consecutive women who underwent HSG for evaluation of infertility were prospectively randomized to undergo the procedure with either a metal cannula (n = 31) or the balloon catheter (n = 30). The HSG procedure was identical in both groups. HSG using the balloon catheter, compared to the metal cannula, required significantly less fluoroscopic time (57.4 ± 17.6 versus 75.6 ± 40.5 s), smaller amounts of contrast medium (7.8 ± 3.9 versus 20.1 ± 15.8 ml), produced less pain (3.8 ± 2.0 versus 5.6 ± 2; on a scale of 1-10), and was easier for the physician to perform (8.8 ± 1.1 versus 6.4 ± 1.9; on a scale of 1-10) (P < 0.01). Eight patients (13%) were diagnosed as having proximal tubal occlusion. It was possible to offer an immediate transcervical tubal catheterization for further diagnosis and treatment of the occlusion only to the five patients with this condition from the balloon catheter group. We conclude that the balloon catheter is superior to the traditional metal cannula for performing HSG. Furthermore, if proximal tubal occlusion is diagnosed, an immediate selective salpingography and transcervical tubal catheterization can be performed without the need to replace the cannula or to reschedule the patient.