Treatment effect of oil-based contrast is related to experienced pain at HSG: a post-hoc analysis of the randomised H2Oil study

No pain relief by virtual reality during hysterosalpingography (HSG): results from a randomized controlled trial

STUDY QUESTION

Is virtual reality (VR) an effective non-pharmacological tool to reduce procedural pain during hysterosalpingography (HSG)?

SUMMARY ANSWER

An HSG with VR does not reduce procedural pain scores compared to an HSG without VR.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

An HSG is often experienced as painful and uncomfortable. VR has been proven successful to reduce acute procedural pain during a variety of medical procedures and interventions.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

We performed a two-centre open-label randomized controlled trial between January 2021 and October 2022.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Women scheduled for HSG as part of their infertility work-up were screened for participation. After informed consent, women were randomized between HSG with or without VR. Due to the nature of the intervention, the study was not blinded. VR was administered by a head-mounted device displaying nature movies and/or relaxation exercises. The primary endpoint was procedural pain measured using VAS (scale 0.0-10.0 cm). Procedural pain was divided into overall pain score and peak pain score during the procedure. It was measured immediately after HSG. Secondary endpoints included patient satisfaction, VR preferences, and adverse effects of VR.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

We included a total of 134 women, 69 to the intervention group (HSG with VR) and 65 to the control group (HSG without VR). The mean VAS for peak pain was 6.80 cm (SD 2.25) in the intervention group versus 6.60 cm (SD 2.40) in the control group (mean difference 0.28 (95% CI -0.57, 1.12), P = 0.52). The mean VAS for overall pain was 5.00 cm (SD 2.10) in the intervention group versus 4.90 cm (SD 2.13) in the control group (mean difference 0.06 (95% CI -0.71, 0.84), P = 0.88). The expectation that VR would be a good distraction from pain during HSG was correlated with both overall and peak pain scores. When correcting for this expectation, we found that women in the intervention group reported significantly higher scores, both in peak (adjusted MD 0.58 (95% CI -0.81, 1.97), P = 0.021) and overall (adjusted MD 0.43 (95% CI -0.84, 1.71), P = 0.013) pain, compared to the control group. There were no differences in the prevalence of symptoms that were considered as adverse effects of VR.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The study was not blinded. Reasons for declining participation in the study were anxiety or wanting full control during HSG, which might have created selection bias. The distraction score possibly indicates that the level of VR immersiveness was not optimal due to the lack of sound and/or the type of VR applications. Future studies should investigate whether more immersive or interactive VR applications could decrease procedural pain scores during HSG.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Since VR does not reduce procedural pain, this additional tool should not be used during HSG.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

There was no external funding for this study. KR and AvH report receiving a travel grant from Merck outside the scope of this study. BM is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) investigator grant (GNT1176437) and BM reports consultancy for Merck, Organon, and Norgine and travel and research funding from Merck. BM holds stock for ObsEva. CL reports receiving research grants from Merck, and Ferring. KD and VM report receiving travel and speaker's fees from Guerbet and research grants from Guerbet. VM also reports research grants from Merck and Ferring. The remaining authors have nothing to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The trial is registered prospectively in the Netherlands Trial Register (trialregister.nl registration number NL9203, currently accessible on trialsearch.who.int).

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

16-01-2021.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

The first participant was enrolled on 19 January 2021.

The effect of prior hysterosalpingo-foam sonography or hysterosalpingography on tubal patency: a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial

STUDY QUESTION

Does hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) prior to hysterosalpingography (HSG) or HSG prior to HyFoSy affect visible tubal patency when compared HSG or HyFoSy alone?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Undergoing either HyFoSy or HSG prior to tubal patency testing by the alternative method does not demonstrate a significant difference in visible tubal patency when compared to HyFoSy or HSG alone.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

HyFoSy and HSG are two commonly used visual tubal patency tests with a high and comparable diagnostic accuracy for evaluating tubal patency. These tests may also improve fertility, although the underlying mechanism is still not fully understood. One of the hypotheses points to a dislodgment of mucus plugs that may have disrupted the patency of the Fallopian tubes.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This is a secondary analysis of the randomized controlled FOAM study, in which women underwent tubal patency testing by HyFoSy and HSG, randomized for order of the procedure. Participants either had HyFoSy first and then HSG, or vice versa. Here, we evaluate the relative effectiveness of tubal patency testing by HyFoSy or HSG prior to the alternative tubal patency testing method on visible tubal patency, compared to each method alone.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Infertile women aged between 18 and 41 years scheduled for tubal patency testing were eligible for participating in the FOAM study. Women with anovulatory cycles, endometriosis, or with a partner with male infertility were excluded. To evaluate the effect HyFoSy on tubal patency, we relied on HSG results by comparing the proportion of women with bilateral tubal patency visible on HSG in those who underwent and who did not undergo HyFoSy prior to their HSG (HyFoSy prior to HSG versus HSG alone). To evaluate the effect of HSG on tubal patency, we relied on HyFoSy results by comparing the proportion of women with bilateral tubal patency visible on HyFoSy in those who underwent and who did not undergo HSG prior to their HyFoSy (HSG prior to HyFoSy versus HyFoSy alone).

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Between May 2015 and January 2019, we randomized 1160 women (576 underwent HyFoSy first followed by HSG, and 584 underwent HSG first followed by HyFoSy). Among the women randomized to HyFoSy prior to HSG, bilateral tubal patency was visible on HSG in 467/537 (87%) women, compared with 472/544 (87%) women who underwent HSG alone (risk difference 0.2%; 95% CI: -3.8% to 4.2%). Among the women randomized to HSG prior to HyFoSy, bilateral tubal patency was visible on HyFoSy in 394/471 (84%) women, compared with 428/486 (88%) women who underwent HyFoSy alone (risk difference -4.4%; 95% CI: -8.8% to 0.0%).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The results of this secondary analysis should be interpreted as exploratory and cannot be regarded as definitive evidence. Furthermore, it has to be noted that pregnancy outcomes were not considered in this analysis.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Tubal patency testing by either HyFoSy or HSG, prior to the alternative tubal patency testing method does not significantly affect visible tubal patency, when compared to alternative method alone. This suggests that both methods may have comparable abilities to dislodge mucus plugs in the Fallopian tubes.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The FOAM study was an investigator-initiated study, funded by ZonMw, a Dutch organization for Health Research and Development (project number 837001504). IQ Medical Ventures provided the ExEm®-FOAM kits free of charge. The funders had no role in study design, collection, analysis, or interpretation of the data. H.R.V. reports consultancy fees from Ferring. M.v.W. received a travel grant from Oxford University Press in the role of Deputy Editor for Human Reproduction and participates in a Data Safety and Monitoring Board as an independent methodologist in obstetrics studies in which she has no other role. M.v.W. is coordinating editor of Cochrane Fertility and Gynaecology. B.W.J.M. received an investigator grant from NHMRC (GNT1176437) and research funding from Merck KGaA. B.W.J.M. reports consultancy for Organon and Merck KGaA, and travel support from Merck KGaA. B.W.J.M. reports holding stocks of ObsEva. V.M. received research grants from Guerbet, Merck and Ferring and travel and speaker fees from Guerbet. The other authors do not report conflicts of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

International Clinical Trials Registry Platform No. NTR4746.

Iodine and other factors associated with fertility outcome following oil-soluble contrast medium hysterosalpingography: a prospective cohort study

Objective

To examine factors associated with fertility following hysterosalpingography (HSG) using an oil-soluble contrast medium (OSCM).

Design

In a prospective cohort study on 196 women undergoing OSCM HSG, we showed that iodine excess was almost universal (98%) and mild subclinical hypothyroidism was frequent (38%). Here, we report the analyses of secondary outcomes examining factors associated with the likelihood of pregnancy following the HSG.

Setting

Auckland, New Zealand (2019-2021).

Sample

196 women with primary or secondary infertility who underwent OSCM HSG.

Methods

Baseline and serial urine iodine concentrations (UIC) and thyroid function tests were measured over six months following the HSG. Pregnancy and treatment with levothyroxine during the study period were documented.

Results

Following OSCM HSG, pregnancy rates were 49% in women aged <40 years (77/158) but considerably lower (16%) among those ≥40 years (6/38). Similarly, live birth rates were markedly lower in women ≥40 years (17%; 1/6) versus <40 years (73%; 56/77). 29% of participants were iodine deficient at baseline despite advice recommending iodine fortification. Following HSG, the likelihood of pregnancy in women with moderate iodine deficiency was 64% higher than in women with normal iodine levels (p=0.048). Among women aged <40 years who had subclinical hypothyroidism (n=75), levothyroxine treatment was associated with higher pregnancy rates compared to untreated women [63% (26/48) vs 37% (10/27), respectively; p=0.047].

Conclusion

OSCM HSG was associated with higher pregnancy rates in women ≤40 than in those aged >40 years. Iodine deficiency was relatively common in this cohort, and increased iodine levels from OSCM exposure may contribute to the improved fertility observed with this procedure.

Trial registration

This study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR: 12620000738921) https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12620000738921.

Oil-soluble contrast medium bathing attenuated endometrial inflammation and improved endometrial receptivity in women with recurrent implantation failure: a descriptive study

BACKGROUND

The oil-soluble contrast medium used in hysterosalpingography has been shown to have a fertility-enhancing effect, but the underlying mechanism is unclear, especially regarding the role of window of implantation (WOI). This study aimed to assess the endometrial immunological impact of the WOI before and after bathing with the oil-soluble contrast medium in women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF).

METHODS

This descriptive study involved two medical centers between December 18, 2019, and December 30, 2020. We included infertile women who underwent three or more transfer cycles, cumulative transplantation of at least four high-quality cleavage-stage embryos or three high-quality blastocysts without clinical pregnancy, and high-quality frozen embryos that were still available for implantation. Patients received 5 ml of ethiodized poppyseed oil bathing, endometrial biopsy around bathing, and frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) within four menstrual cycles after bathing. Patients were excluded if failure to complete anyone. Data on the baseline characteristics and clinical data of the FET cycles were collected, and endometrial biopsy specimens were collected in the luteal phase before and after bathing and subjected to immunohistochemistry. The number of CD56 and CD138 positive cells and H-score of expression of ανβ-3 and HOXA10 in endometrium were collected.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients were initially enrolled in the study; ultimately, twelve patients with a median age of 32.5 years (range 27-40 years) completed the research. The median number of embryo transfer cycles was three (range 3-8). A total of 4 of 12 women (33.33%) were diagnosed with chronic endometritis before oil-soluble contrast bathing. After bathing, the median numbers of CD138-positive cells in endometrium decreased from 0.75 (range 0-13.5) to 0.65 (range 0-6), P = 0.035; additionally, the H-score of expression of ανβ-3 in endometrium increased from 148.50 ± 31.63 to 175.58 ± 31.83, P < 0.001. The thickness of the endometrium also significantly increased (8.90 ± 1.45 mm vs.10.11 ± 1.98 mm, P = 0.005). However, no consistent changes were found in the expression of CD56 and HOXA10 in the endometrium. Five patients experienced biochemical pregnancies (41.67%), four had clinical pregnancies (33.33%), and three achieved live births following oil-soluble contrast bathing (25%).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that oil-soluble contrast medium bathing decreased CD138-positive cells and upregulated expression of ανβ-3 during WOI in patients with RIF. This histological impact of endometrium may result in enhanced fertility during FET cycles. Investigating the ability of intrauterine bathing with lower-dosage oil-soluble contrast to improve pregnancy in the RIF population is warranted.

Evaluating prognosis in unexplained infertility

IMPORTANCE

The diagnosis of unexplained infertility presents a dilemma as it signifies both uncertainty about the cause of infertility and the potential for natural conception. Immediate treatment of all would result in overtreatment. Prediction models estimating the likelihood of natural conception and subsequent live birth can guide treatment decisions.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate if in couples with unexplained infertility, prediction models are effective in guiding treatment decisions.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

This review examines 25 studies that assess prediction models for natural conception in couples with unexplained infertility in terms of derivation, validation, and impact analysis.

FINDINGS

The largest prediction models have been integrated in the synthesis models of Hunault, which includes female age and infertility duration, having been pregnant before and motile sperm percentage. Despite its limited discriminative capacity, this model demonstrates excellent calibration. Importantly, the impact of the Hunault model has been evaluated in randomized clinical trials, and shows that in couples with unexplained infertility and 12-month natural conception chances exceeding 30%, immediate treatment with intrauterine insemination (IUI) and controlled ovarian hyperstimulation is not better than expectant management for 6 months. Below the threshold of 30%, treatment with IUI is superior over expectant management, but immediate in vitro fertilization was not better than IUI.

CONCLUSION

In couples with unexplained infertility and a good prognosis for natural conception, treatment can be delayed, whereas in couples with a poor prognosis, immediate treatment (with IUI-controlled ovarian hyperstimulation) is warranted.

RELEVANCE

These data indicate that in couples with unexplained infertility, integration of prediction models into clinical decision making can optimize treatment selection and maximize fertility outcomes while limiting unnecessary treatment.

Enhancing Fertility in the Same Cycle: A Case Report on Effects of Hysterosalpingo-Foam Sonography (HyFoSy) for a Couple With Mild Infertility

Fertility issues are becoming increasingly prevalent, leading many couples to seek fertility treatment at specialized centers. Infertility is a diverse clinical condition, with multiple potential etiologic factors and variable severity in its manifestation. Regardless of the underlying factors and severity, routine fertility assessment rarely differs between cases, with an essential step being fallopian tube patency assessment. Hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) is the latest available diagnostic technique to assess this parameter, offering robust results, with reduced intra-procedural pain and equipment requirements, in the convenience of the office setting. However, apart from its diagnostic value, HyFoSy has also demonstrated a therapeutic tubal flushing effect, that may be the decisive factor for couples with mild infertility to spontaneously conceive. In this report, we present the case of a couple with mild infertility, who managed to spontaneously conceive after a HyFoSy examination, and in fact within the same cycle.

Impact of oil-based contrast agents in hysterosalpingography on fertility outcomes in endometriosis: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have suggested that oil-based contrast agents used during hysterosalpingography (HSG) in infertile patients can enhance fertility. However, limited research has investigated the effect of oil-based contrast medium specifically in individuals with endometriosis-related infertility.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to explore the impact of oil-based contrast medium on fertility outcomes in women with endometriosis-related infertility.

METHODS

Conducted at the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University (January 2020 to June 2022), the study included 512 patients undergoing HSG. Patients were categorized into oil-based and non-oil-based groups, and after propensity score matching, demographic characteristics were compared. Main outcomes included clinical pregnancy rates, live birth rates, early miscarriage rates, and ectopic pregnancy rates.

RESULTS

In our analysis, the Oil-based group showed significantly better outcomes compared to the Non-oil-based group. Specifically, the Oil-based group had higher clinical pregnancy rates (51.39% vs. 27.36%) and increased live birth rates (31.48% vs. 19.93%). This trend held true for expectant treatment, IUI, and IVF/ICSI, except for surgical treatment where no significant difference was observed. After adjusting for various factors using propensity score matching, the Non-oil-based group consistently exhibited lower clinical pregnancy rates compared to the Oil-based group. The Odds Ratio (OR) was 0.38 (95%CI: 0.27-0.55) without adjustment, 0.34 (0.22-0.51) in multivariable analysis, 0.39 (0.27-0.57) using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), and 0.22 (0.14-0.35) in propensity score matching.

CONCLUSION

Oil-based contrast medium used in HSG for women with endometriosis-related infertility is associated with higher clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates compared to Non-oil-based contrast medium.

Severe Pain and Postoperative Effects during Hysterosalpingography: A Meta-Analysis

Background

We aimed to evaluate the impact of pain on patients during Hysterosalpingography (HSG).

Methods

PubMed, PMC and other journals were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTS) on HSG. Appropriate articles were selected for inclusion and reasonable exclusion according to keywords. Following a thorough review of the relevant literature, the process of literature screening was conducted in accordance with the aforementioned criteria. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the risk of bias assessment tool developed by the Cochrane Collaboration. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4.1 software.

Results

Twelve studies were included, including 1530 cases in the experimental group and 1545 cases in the control group. The literature summarizes the basic information of patients during HSG and makes statistics on the differences in visual analog scale (VAS) and pain perception. The findings from the HSG examination revealed a lack of significant association between patients' pain sensation and their age and BMI. However, the duration of pregnancy in patients decreased following HSG treatment (95%CI (-18.84 to -3.58), P=0.004).Compared with conventional testing, HSG could effectively reduce the pregnancy time of patients (95%CI (-18.84, -3.58), P=0.004), reduce the VAS of patients (95%CI (-4.73, -1.51), P=0.0001), and increase the number of patients without pain (95%CI (1.80, 10.43), P=0.001).

Conclusion

During the HSG examination, acceptable pain avoidance is generated and can be relieved over time. At present, there is no effective alternative method, so the patient should cooperate with the doctor to complete the examination, to relieve the pain.

Effect of comfort theory-based nursing care on pain and comfort in women undergoing hysterosalpingography: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine the effect of comfort theory-based nursing care on pain and comfort in women undergoing hysterosalpingography.

METHODS

This randomized control trial was conducted on 126 women (42 in each intervention and control group). Virtual reality glasses group (n=42), mobile-assisted education group (n=42), and control group (n=42). The control group received only routine care. Comfort levels were evaluated at the beginning and end of the study using the General Comfort Scale and pain levels evaluated at the beginning and end of the study using the Visual Analog Scale.

RESULTS

The comfort theory-based nursing care (virtual reality glasses and mobile-assisted education group) was effective in increasing women's comfort with painful invasive procedures such as hysterosalpingography and reducing pain.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that a nurse be present in the hysterosalpingography process, providing nursing care services continuously and introducing this program to working nurses.Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT04676932.

Effect of interval time between hysterosalpingography and intrauterine insemination on the pregnancy outcome of infertile patients

Background

Hysterosalpingography (HSG) is the most commonly applied tubal patency test in clinical practice. Although some studies have found an increased pregnancy rate after HSG, no studies to date have specifically characterized the effect of interval time between HSG and IUI on pregnancy outcome.

Objectives

To investigate the effect of interval time between HSG and intrauterine insemination (IUI) on live birth rates of infertile patients.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study. The reproductive medical record system was used to identify patients who completed ≥1 IUI cycle between January 2017 and October 2021. According to the interval time between HSG and IUI, patients were divided into three groups: <6months interval group,6-12 months interval group and >12 months interval group. The generalized estimating equation with Poisson distribution was used to estimate the risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of different groups.

Results

A total of 413 patients completed 701 IUI cycles during the study period, <6months interval group, 415 cycles; 6-12 months interval group, 138 cycles; >12 months interval group, 148 cycles. The live birth rate of <6 months group was higher than other two groups (17.35% vs. 12.32% vs. 8.11%, P=0.017); Similarly, the clinical pregnancy rate of <6 months group was also higher than other two groups (19.76% vs. 14.49% vs.11.49%, P=0.049). When adjusted separately for FSH, AMH, infertility type, duration of infertility, infertility diagnosis, total motile count (TMC) of sperm, medications, endometrium size and dominant follicle size, the live birth rate of >12 months group severally significantly decreased by 60% (adjusted RR = 0.40, 95% CI [0.19-1.40]). The cumulative clinical pregnancy and live birth rates of <6 months group were higher than other two groups (P<0.05), but the cumulative pregnancy rate among three groups were not statistically different (log rank test: P=0.06).

Conclusion

The interval time between hysterosalpingography and IUI is related to pregnancy outcome. The clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were the highest when the time interval was less than 6 months. Therefore, IUI should be recommend as soon as possible after HSG if the patient couple meets the IUI indication.

Comparison of fertility outcomes between oil‑based and water‑based contrast media during hysterosalpingography: A meta‑analysis

Water-based and oil-based contrast media are both widely used in clinical practice for patients receiving hysterosalpingography (HSG). However, minor controversy exists about whether the oil-based contrast medium has a superior fertility-enhancing effect during HSG. The present meta-analysis intended to comprehensively compare the fertility outcomes of patients receiving either an oil-based or a water-based contrast medium during HSG. Web of Science, PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database, Cochrane, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and China Science and Technology Journal Database were examined for literature comparing the fertility enhancement between oil-based and water-based contrast media during HSG up to November 10, 2022 and there was no cut off for studies published earlier than any given year. Data for clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, live birth, miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy were extracted and analyzed. A total of 11 studies with 2,462 patients receiving oil-based contrast medium and 2,830 patients receiving water-based contrast medium during HSG were included. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were presented for outcome assessment, and the random effects model was utilized for all analyses. Publication bias was analyzed using Egger's and Begg's tests. The results indicated that the rate of clinical pregnancy was increased using oil-based contrast medium compared with water-based contrast medium [relative risk (RR) (95% CI), 1.29 (1.07, 1.54); P=0.006]. In addition, the rate of ongoing pregnancy [RR (95% CI), 1.39 (1.22, 1.59); P#x003C;0.001] and live birth [RR (95% CI), 1.41 (1.07, 1.87); P=0.016] were also increased using oil-based contrast medium compared with water-based contrast medium. However, miscarriage [RR (95% CI), 1.06 (0.61, 1.86); P=0.833] and ectopic pregnancy [RR (95% CI), 0.66 (0.18, 2.36); P=0.518] were not affected by using oil-based or water-based contrast medium. Begg's test and Egger's test suggested that no publication bias of clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, live birth, miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy existed (all P>0.05), which indicated the stability of the present meta-analysis. In conclusion, the oil-based contrast medium enhances fertility outcomes compared with the water-based contrast medium in patients receiving HSG.

A meta-analysis of fertility and adverse outcomes in oil- and water-based contrast for hysterosalpingography

Infertility is the inability to conceive after one year of regular unprotected intercourse. There is a debate about the therapeutic effect of hysterosalpingography (HSG) and whether the selection of contrast materials makes a difference in the chance of subsequent conception. In this study, we aimed to compare the fertility-enhancing outcomes and adverse effects of oil and water-based contrasts in patients who underwent HSG. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. We searched the Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus until September 2022. We included all primary randomized controlled trials evaluating the fertility-enhancing benefits of HSG in oil-based versus water-based contrast media in women of childbearing age with infertility. Eleven studies with 4,739 patients were selected. The pregnancy rate in the oil group was significantly higher than that in the water group [odds ratio (OR)=1.51 (1.23, 1.86), p<0.0001]. Our meta-analysis favored the oil group in abdominal pain and vaginal bleeding with the odd ratios of 0.73 (0.58, 0.91), (p=0.006) and 0.91 (0.46, 1.81), (p=0.79), respectively. Water-based contrast was associated with less intravasation [OR=2.09 (1.09-4.02), p=0.03]. There were no differences between the contrasts for miscarriage [OR=1.02 (0.71, 1.46), p=0.92], and ectopic pregnancy [OR=0.84 (0.27, 2.63), p=0.77]. HSG with oil-based contrast was related to a higher pregnancy rate, live birth rate, and intravasation rate. While HSG using a water-based contrast medium was associated with increased abdominal discomfort, vaginal bleeding, and the visual-analogue scale pain score.

Fertility-enhancing effect of oil-based contrast agents during hysterosalpingography and the variation of this effect within a 3-year follow-up period in infertile patients

Objective

The previous study has indicated the fertility-enhancing effect of oil-based contrast agents during hysterosalpingography (HSG) in infertile patients. However, the variation of this effect with the time frame is seldom reported. The current study aimed to explore fertility improvement using oil-based contrast agents and the change of this improvement during the 3-year follow-up period in infertile patients.

Materials and methods

Infertile women who underwent HSG with oil-based contrast agents (N = 500) or water-based contrast agents (N = 500) were enrolled. Spontaneous pregnancy rate and time to pregnancy were assessed at months (M)1, M2, M3, M6, M12, M24, and M36 after HSG.

Results

The spontaneous pregnancy rate was 79% in the oil-based group and 70.2% in the water-based group. The cumulative spontaneous pregnancy rate was increased in the oil-based group when compared with the water-based group (p = 0.015). Fertility-enhancing effect of HSG was increased in the oil-based group when compared with the water-based group at all time points {M1 [odds ratio (OR)]: 1.536}; M2 (OR: 1.455); M3 (OR: 1.494); M6 (OR: 1.356); M9 (OR: 1.288); M12 (OR: 1.249); M24 (OR: 1.131); and M36 (OR: 1.125). While this superiority of the fertility-enhancing effect of HSG in the oil-based group (vs. the water-based group) was decreased with the time frame. Similar findings were also observed based on the physiological cycles.

Conclusion

The HSG procedure with oil-based contrast agents shows a fertility-enhancing effect when compared to water-based contrast agents. This improvement could last at least 1 year while dropping to the normal level within the subsequent 2 years.

Oil-based versus water-based contrast media for hysterosalpingography in infertile women of advanced age, with ovulation disorders or a high risk for tubal pathology: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial (H2Oil2 study)

BACKGROUND

In women with unexplained infertility, tubal flushing with oil-based contrast during hysterosalpingography (HSG) increases ongoing pregnancy and subsequent live birth rates when compared to tubal flushing with water-based contrast. It is currently unclear whether an HSG with oil-based contrast also results in more ongoing pregnancies and live births in women of advanced age, women with ovulation disorders, and women with potential tubal pathology when compared to an HSG with water-based contrast.

METHODS

We plan an international, multicentre, open-label, randomized controlled trial (RCT) studying three groups of infertile women who have an indication for tubal patency testing according to their treating physician and additionally; (1) are 39 years of age or older, (2) have an ovulation disorder or (3) have a high risk for tubal pathology based on their medical history. Women with an allergy for iodinated contrast medium are excluded, as are women with diabetes, hyperprolactinemia or untreated hyper- or hypothyroidism, and women with a partner with severe male infertility. After informed consent, women will be randomly allocated to the intervention, tubal flushing with the use of oil-based contrast during HSG or the control group, tubal flushing with the use of water-based contrast during HSG in a 1:1 ratio by the web-based system Castor. The primary endpoint will be ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth with conception within six months after randomization. Secondary outcomes are other pregnancy outcomes, used fertility treatments, adverse events and cost-effectiveness. Based on the expected ongoing pregnancy rate of 17% in the control group and 27% in the intervention group, the sample size will be 930 women (465 per group). Study inclusion is expected to be complete in four years.

DISCUSSION

This multicentre RCT will establish whether, for women of advanced age, women with ovulatory disease, and women who have a high risk for tubal pathology, there is a fertility enhancing effect of tubal flushing with oil-based contrast during HSG and whether the use of this contrast medium is cost-effective. Trial Registration The study was prospectively registered in the Netherlands Trial Register on August 1st 2019 as 'H2Oil2' (reference number NL7925, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/7925 ).

Evaluating Fallopian Tube Patency: What the Radiologist Needs to Know

Impaired tubal patency accounts for up to 35% of cases of subfertility and infertility. Hysterosalpingography (HSG) or hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography (HyCoSy) represents a first-line test in evaluating fallopian tube patency. Despite the association of HSG with ionizing radiation, HSG is a reference standard in assessing fallopian tube patency and tubal conditions such as tubal occlusion, salpingitis isthmica nodosa, and hydrosalpinx. HSG is widely available and utilizes either a water-soluble contrast medium (WSCM) or an oil-soluble contrast medium (OSCM). Compared with WSCM, HSG with OSCM results in a higher incidence of non-in vitro fertilization pregnancies and, therefore, may be preferred in women younger than 38 years with unexplained subfertility. HSG may also be helpful in assessment after sterilization or before fallopian tube recanalization. US-based tubal tests are free of ionizing radiation and include HyCoSy, with either air-saline or microbubble US contrast material, and hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy), a tubal patency test that utilizes a gel foam. A comprehensive US infertility evaluation of the pelvis and fallopian tubes can be achieved in one setting by adding coronal three-dimensional imaging of the uterus, saline infusion sonohysterography, and HyCoSy or HyFoSy to routine pelvic US. MR HSG and virtual CT HSG also depict tubal patency and uterine and adnexal pathologic conditions and may be considered in select patients. While laparoscopic chromopertubation remains the standard for tubal patency evaluation, its disadvantages are its invasiveness and cost. Knowledge of the different fallopian tube tests and radiologic appearance of normal and abnormal fallopian tubes results in fewer pitfalls, accurate interpretation, and optimal patient care. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2021.

Therapeutic effects of hysterosalpingography contrast media in infertile women: what do we know about the H2O in the H2Oil trial and why does it matter?

Recent interest in the use of oil-soluble contrast media (OSCM) for hysterosalpingography (HSG) and other tubal flushing procedures is largely the result of publication of the large, multicentre, randomized controlled H2Oil trial in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2017, addressing the long-held suspicion that pregnancy rates following HSG with OSCM are higher than if a water-soluble contrast media (WSCM) is used. However, the findings of this trial have been compromised by the WSCM selected for comparison with OSCM. The chosen WSCM belongs to a superceded class of ionic media, with an iodine concentration, osmolality and viscosity all lying at the extreme end of the range for water-soluble radiographic contrast. The requirement for safe, cheap, versatile WSCM for intravascular use during computerized tomography, angiography and interventional procedures has resulted in considerable refinement of WSCM, with current widespread use of non-ionic, low osmolality or iso-osmolar WSCM in radiology, including for HSG. However, the use of the earlier ionic, high osmolality agents such as that selected for the H2Oil trial persists for HSG in some centres, despite potential adverse effects on the endometrium and fallopian tubal epithelium compared with more modern, less toxic WSCM. Knowledge of the variety of physical and chemical characteristics of the available WSCM is essential for interpretation of the current literature and establishing the most effective and safe water-soluble agent to use for HSG. Design of future clinical trials to establish the potential superiority of OSCM over WSCM for fertility enhancement must include the use of the readily available, inexpensive modern WSCM. While the fertility rates following OSCM HSG have been shown to be high in women with idiopathic infertility, more robust trials are required before the widespread use of OSCM for HSG or other modalities such as ultrasound and laparoscopy should be adopted.

Iodine and fertility: do we know enough?

Iodine is a vital micronutrient and its importance in thyroid function is well established. However, abnormalities in iodine intake may also have other effects. In particular, iodine is taken up avidly by the ovary and endometrium. Iodine deficiency is associated with reduced fertility. The use of high iodine concentration contrast media has recently been shown to improve conception rates in couples with unexplained infertility (UI). We hypothesize that this improvement could be related to the iodine excess and mechanisms independent of its action on thyroid. In this article, the metabolism of iodine and its potential role in fertility will be discussed, including the impact of both iodine deficiency and excess states and the importance of iodine in normal fetal development. This will include insights from animal studies on the effect of iodine in the uterine and ovarian structural environment, hormonal milieu and immunological factors affecting implantation. We speculate that iodine may well have a role as a potential therapy for UI.

Tubal Flushing Treatment for Unexplained Infertility

Tubal patency testing was initially introduced as a diagnostic test. However, it has been observed that some tubal patency tests also have a therapeutic effect. This therapeutic effect can be influenced by the contrast medium used during tubal flushing. In this review, we discuss current evidence associated with different methods for tubal flushing and their potential impact on reproductive outcomes in women with unexplained infertility. Furthermore, we discuss their diagnostic accuracy, safety, and cost-effectiveness.

Effects of oil-soluble versus water-soluble contrast media at hysterosalpingography on pregnancy outcomes in women with a low risk of tubal disease: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, due to various factors, the rate of infertility in China has increased and now affects over 10% of women of reproductive age. Hysterosalpingography (HSG) is a common diagnostic procedure during fertility examinations. However, there is no consensus on the choice of contrast agents and their effects. As the largest multicentre, randomised controlled trial (H2Oil trial from the Netherlands) has shown that oil-soluble contrast at HSG can enhance fertility compared with water-soluble contrast, we propose this study to examine whether the use of oil-soluble contrast media results in increased rates of pregnancy in Chinese women undergoing HSG.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study is a single-centre, randomised, controlled, parallel-group, superiority trial. Patients with low risk of tubal disease will be randomised to undergo HSG using iodinated oil injection (OSCM group, oil-soluble contrast media) or ioversol injection (WSCM group, water-soluble contrast media). To evaluate the potential superiority of the OSCM group, with 1:1 allocation ratio, 90% statistical power and a two-sided significance level of 5%, we have calculated a sample of 520 women per group to be enrolled, for a total of 1040 including 10% loss to follow-up or protocol variation. The primary outcome is the rate of ongoing pregnancy during 6 months after randomisation. The secondary outcomes will consist of thyroid function of patients and newborns, pain scores during HSG, rate of live birth, clinical pregnancies, miscarriages, ectopic pregnancy, time to ongoing pregnancy, time to live birth, cost calculations of the OSCM group/WSCM group, and assisted reproductive technology treatments between the two groups.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol received authorisation from the Medical Research Ethics Committee of International Peace Maternity and Child Health Hospital on 18 January 2020 (approval no GKLW2020-02). The findings will be reported in peer-reviewed publications and presentations at international scientific meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2000031612.

Tubal flushing for subfertility

BACKGROUND

Establishing the subgroup analysis of the fallopian tubes (tubes) is a commonly undertaken diagnostic investigation for women with subfertility. This is usually achieved by flushing contrast medium through the tubes and visualising patency on radiographs, ultrasonography or laparoscopy. Many women were noted to conceive in the first three to six months after tubal flushing, raising the possibility that tubal flushing could also be a treatment for infertility. There has been debate about which contrast medium should be used (water-soluble or oil-soluble media) as this may influence pregnancy rates. An important adverse event during tubal flushing is intravasation (backflow of contrast medium into the blood or lymphatic vessels),which could lead to embolism although it is asymptomatic in most cases.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of tubal flushing with oil-soluble contrast media (OSCM) and water-soluble contrast media (WSCM) on subsequent fertility outcomes in women with subfertility.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, reference lists of identified articles and trial registries. The most recent search was conducted in April 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tubal flushing with OSCM, WSCM with each other or with no treatment, in women with subfertility.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. The overall quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen trials involving 3864 women were included in this systematic review. Overall, the quality of evidence varied from very low to moderate: the main limitations were risk of bias, heterogeneity and imprecision. OSCM versus no treatment Four studies (506 women) were included in this comparison. Tubal flushing with OSCM may increase the odds of live birth (odds ratio (OR) 3.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57 to 6.85, 3 RCTs, 204 women, I² = 0, low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following no treatment is assumed to be 11%, the chance following tubal flushing with OSCM would be between 16% and 46%. Tubal flushing with OSCM may increase in the odds of clinical pregnancy (OR 3.54, 95% CI 2.08 to 6.02, 4 RCTs, 506 women, I² = 18%, low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of clinical pregnancy following no treatment is assumed to be 9%, the chance following tubal flushing with OSCM would be between 17% and 37%. No study measured intravasation or other adverse events such as infection, haemorrhage and congenital abnormalities. WSCM versus no treatment Only one study (334 women) was included in this comparison. We are uncertain whether tubal flushing with WSCM increase live birth compared to no treatment (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.91, 1 RCT, 334 women, low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following no treatment is assumed to be 21%, the chance following tubal flushing with WSCM would be between 15% and 33%. We are uncertain whether tubal flushing with WSCM increases clinical pregnancy compared to no treatment (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.84, 1 RCT, 334 women, low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of clinical pregnancy following no treatment is assumed to be 27%, the chance following tubal flushing with WSCM would be between 29% and 40%. One case with pelvic infection was reported in the WSCM group and no case with infection in the no treatment group in a one study (334 women). Meta-analysis was not performed due to the rare events. No study measured intravasation or other adverse events such as infection, haemorrhage and congenital abnormalities. OSCM versus WSCM Six studies (2598 women) were included in this comparison. Three studies reported live birth, including two with higher live birth in the OSCM group (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.11, 1119 women; OR 3.45, 95% CI 1.97 to 6.03, 398 women); and one with insufficient evidence of a difference between groups (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.40, 533 women). Given the substantial heterogeneity observed (I² = 86%), meta-analysis was not performed. Tubal flushing with OSCM probably increased in the odds of intravasation (asymptomatic) compared to tubal flushing with WSCM (OR 5.00, 95% CI 2.25 to 11.12, 4 RCTs, 1912 women, I² = 0, moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of intravasation following tubal flushing with WSCM is assumed to be 1%, the chance following tubal flushing with OSCM would be between 2% and 9%. Tubal flushing with OSCM may increase the odds of clinical pregnancy (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.85, 6 RCTs, 2598 women, I² = 41%, low-quality evidence). This suggests that if the chance of clinical pregnancy following tubal flushing with WSCM is assumed to be 26%, the chance following tubal flushing with OSCM would be between 28% and 39%. We are uncertain whether tubal flushing with OSCM decreases the odds of infection (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.22, 2 RCTs, 662 women, I² = 0, very low-quality evidence) or haemorrhage (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.06, 2 RCTs, 662 women, I² = 0, very low-quality evidence). Three neonates with congenital abnormalities were reported in the OSCM group while no congenital abnormality was reported in the WSCM group in one study (1119 women). No meta-analysis was performed due to the rare events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence suggests that compared to no treatment, tubal flushing with OSCM may increase the chance of live birth and clinical pregnancy, while it is uncertain whether tubal flushing with WSCM improves those outcomes. Compared to tubal flushing with WSCM, OSCM may improve clinical pregnancy while meta-analysis was impossible for live birth due to heterogeneity. Evidence also suggests that OSCM is associated with an increased risk of asymptomatic intravasation. Overall, adverse events, especially long-term adverse events, are poorly reported across studies.

How long does the fertility-enhancing effect of hysterosalpingography with oil-based contrast last?

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does the fertility-enhancing effect of tubal flushing during hysterosalpingography (HSG) with oil-based contrast change over time?

DESIGN

This was a secondary analysis of the H2Oil (long-term follow-up) study, a multicentre randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of oil-based and water-based contrast during HSG. The main outcome was ongoing pregnancy. Cox proportional hazards models for time to ongoing pregnancy were fitted over 3 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

Data on 1107 couples were available; 550 couples had oil-based contrast and 557 water-based contrast at HSG. Ongoing pregnancy rates after 3 years were 77% and 71%, respectively. Median follow-up was 9-10 months (5th-95th percentile: <1 to 36). The hazard ratio for ongoing pregnancy for oil versus water over 3 years of follow-up was 1.26 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.45). The scaled Schoenfeld residual plots showed a decrease in hazard ratio that was linear with log-transformed time. After including an interaction with log-transformed time, the hazard ratio immediately after HSG was 1.71 (95% CI 1.27-2.31) and reduced to no effect (hazard ratio of 1) at approximately 2 years. There was no evidence for a change in hazard ratio over time in a subgroup of women who experienced pain during HSG.

CONCLUSIONS

The hazard ratio for ongoing pregnancy of oil-based versus water-based contrast was 1.71 immediately after HSG, gradually decreasing and plateauing towards a hazard ratio of 1 (indicating no effect) after approximately 2 years. This supports the hypothesis that oil-based contrast might dislodge debris or mucus plugs from the Fallopian tubes, but this has yet to be definitively proved.

Tubal flushing with oil-based or water-based contrast at hysterosalpingography for infertility: long-term reproductive outcomes of a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of oil-based versus water-based contrast on pregnancy and live birth rates ≤5 years after hysterosalpingography (HSG) in infertile women.

DESIGN

A 5-year follow-up study of a multicenter randomized trial.

SETTING

Hospitals.

PATIENT(S)

Infertile women with an ovulatory cycle, 18-39 years of age, and having a low risk of tubal pathology.

INTERVENTION(S)

Use of oil-based versus water-based contrast during HSG.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Ongoing pregnancy, live births, time to ongoing pregnancy, second ongoing pregnancy.

RESULT(S)

A total of 1,119 women were randomly assigned to HSG with oil-based contrast (n = 557) or water-based contrast (n = 562). After 5 years, 444 of 555 women in the oil group (80.0%) and 419 of 559 women in the water group (75.0%) had an ongoing pregnancy (relative risk [RR] 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.14), and 415 of 555 women in the oil group (74.8%) and 376 of 559 women in the water group (67.3%) had live births (RR 1.11; 95% CI 1.03-1.20). In the oil group, 228 pregnancies (41.1%) were conceived naturally versus 194 (34.7%) pregnancies in the water group (RR 1.18; 95% CI 1.02-1.38). The time to ongoing pregnancy was significantly shorter in the oil group versus the water group (10.0 vs. 13.7 months; hazard ratio, 1.25; 95% CI 1.09-1.43). No difference was found in the occurrence of a second ongoing pregnancy.

CONCLUSION(S)

During a 5-year time frame, ongoing pregnancy and live birth rates are higher after tubal flushing with oil-based contrast during HSG compared with water-based contrast. More pregnancies are naturally conceived and time to ongoing pregnancy is shorter after HSG with oil-based contrast.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Netherlands Trial Register (NTR) 3270 and NTR6577(www.trialregister.nl).