Você pesquisou por y - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

You searched for:"Maria Teresinha de Oliveira Cardoso"

We found (1) results for your search.
  • Artigos Originais

    Sonohysterography accuracy versus transvaginal ultrasound in infertile women candidate to assisted reproduction techniques

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2012;34(3):122-127

    Summary

    Artigos Originais

    Sonohysterography accuracy versus transvaginal ultrasound in infertile women candidate to assisted reproduction techniques

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2012;34(3):122-127

    DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032012000300006

    Views1

    PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of sonohysterography (HSN) and conventional transvaginal ultrasound (USG) in assessing the uterine cavity of infertile women candidate to assisted reproduction techniques (ART). METHODS: Comparative cross-sectional study with 120 infertile women candidate to ART, assisted at Centro de Reprodução Assistida (CRA) of Hospital Regional da Asa Sul (HRAS), Brasília - DF, from August 2009 to November 2010. Sonohysterography was performed with saline solution infusion in a close system. The sonohysterography finding was compared to previous USG results. The uterine cavity was considered abnormal when the endometrium was found to be thicker than expected during the menstrual cycle and when an endometrial polyp, a submucous myoma and an abnormal shape of the uterine cavity were observed. The statistical analysis was done using absolute frequencies, percentage values and the χ², with the level of significance set at 5%. RESULTS: HSN revealed that 92 (76.7%) infertile women candidate to ART had a normal uterine cavity, while 28 (23.3%) had the following abnormalities: 15 polyps (12.5%), 9 cases of abnormal shape of the uterine cavity (7.5%), 6 submucous myomas (5%), 4 cases of inadequate endometrial thickness for the menstrual cycle phase (3.3%), and 2 cases of uterine septum (1.7%); 5 women presented more than one abnormality (4.2%). While USG showed alteration in the cavity only in 5 (4.2%) women, the sonohysterography confirmed 4 out of the 5 abnormalities shown by USG and detected an abnormal uterine cavity in 24 other women, who had not been detected by USG. This means that sonohysterography was able to detect more abnormalities in the uterine cavity than USG, with a statistically significant difference (p=0.002). CONCLUSION: The sonohysterography was more accurate than USG in the assessment of the uterine cavity of this cohort of infertile women candidate to ART. The sonohysterography can be easily incorporated into the investigation of these women and contribute to reducing embryo implantation failures.

    See more

Search

Search in:

Article type
abstract
book-review
brief-report
case-report
case-report -
correction
editorial
editorial -
letter
letter -
other
other -
rapid-communication
research-article
research-article -
review-article
review-article -
Section
Arigos Originais
Artigo de Revisão
Original Articles
Carta ao Editor
Carta ao Editor
Cartas
Case Report
Case Reports
Caso e Tratamento
Clinical Consensus Recommendation
Corrigendum
Editoriais
Editorial
Editorial
Equipamentos e Métodos
Errata
Erratas
Erratum
Febrasgo Position Statement
Febrasgo Statement
Febrasgo Statement Position
FIGO Statement
Integrative Review
Letter to Editor
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor
Métodos e Técnicas
Nota do Editor
Nota Prévia
Original Article
Original Article/Contraception
Original Article/Infertility
Original Article/Obstetrics
Original Article/Oncology
Original Article/Sexual Violence/Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology
Original Article/Teaching and Training
Original Articles
Original Articles
Relato de Caso
Relato de Casos
Relatos de Casos
Reply to the Letter to the Editor
Resposta dos Autores
Resumo De Tese
Resumo De Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Teses
Resumos de Teses
Resumos dos Trabalhos Premiados no 50º Congresso Brasileiro de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revisão
Revisão
Short Communication
Special Article
Systematic Review
Técnica e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Métodos
Trabalhos Originais
Year / Volume
2024; v.46
2023; v.45
2022; v.44
2021; v.43
2020; v.42
2019; v.41
2018; v.40
2017; v.39
2016; v.38
2015; v.37
2014; v.36
2013; v.35
2012; v.34
2011; v.33
2010; v.32
2009; v.31
2008; v.30
2007; v.29
2006; v.28
2005; v.27
2004; v.26
2003; v.25
2002; v.24
2001; v.23
2000; v.22
1999; v.21
1998; v.20
ISSUE