High incidence of tubal dysfunction is determined by laparoscopy in cases with positive antibody despite negative finding in prior hysterosalpingography.

Hysterosalpingography (HSG) is one of the most commonly used methods in order to evaluate the condition of fallopian tubes in infertility clinics. In the present paper, we retrospectively compared the findings of HSG and laparoscopy to elucidate the relationship between tubal dysfunction and background factors, such as infection, endometriosis and previous surgery. We retrospectively reviewed clinical records of 314 patients who were examined by both HSG and laparoscopy between 1996 and 2001 in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Tokyo. When HSG findings were evaluated in reference to those of laparoscopy, sensitivity and specificity for tubal patency were 0.63 and 0.79, respectively, whereas those for peri-tubal adhesion were 0.65 and 0.61, respectively. We compared the percentage of existence of background factors between the patients who were diagnosed as normal by both HSG and laparoscopy (Group L[+]) and those whose fallopian tubes were observed as patent by HSG, but were not patent by chromopertubation under laparoscopy (Group L[-]). The percentage of patients with positive chlamydial antibodies in Group L(-) (42.9%, 15/35) was significantly higher than that of patients with positive chlamydial antibodies in Group L(+) (22.8%, 44/193,  < 0.05). These finding suggested that even if HSG showed normally patent tubes in a patient with positive antibodies, the possibility of tubal occulusion still remains high and further examination by laparoscopy is recommended. (Reprod Med Biol 2007; : 39-43).