Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 30, 2026
Improved Hysteroscopic Resection of Endometrial Polyps Using 6-Fr Micro-Scissors and Forceps
Published on: August 2, 2024
Saline contrast hysterosonography in abnormal uterine bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Cornelis D de Kroon1, Geertruida H de Bock, Sandra W M Dieben
1Department of Gynaecology, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands.
Objective:
To assess the diagnostic accuracy of saline contrast hysterosonography in the evaluation of the uterine cavity in women complaining of abnormal uterine bleeding.
Design:
A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic studies that compared saline contrast hysterosonography to a gold standard diagnosis based on either hysteroscopy with or without histological sampling or to hysterectomy.
Setting:
University Hospital.
Sample:
Twenty-four studies (including 2278 procedures).
Methods:
Electronic databases were searched for relevant studies and references were cross checked. Validity was assessed and data were extracted independently by two authors. Heterogeneity was calculated, studies were plotted in an ROC area and data were pooled. Subgroup analysis was performed according to the validity area.
Main Outcome Measures:
The success rate of saline contrast hysterosonography. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio's and post-test probabilities of saline contrast hysterosonography on the prediction of uterine cavity abnormality.
Results:
The largest population of homogeneous data were the studies with complete verification. In these studies, the pooled sensitivity and pooled specificity of saline contrast hysterosonography in uterine cavity evaluation were respectively 0.95 (95% CI 0.93 to 0.97) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.92), the likelihood ratios were respectively 8.23 (95% CI 6.2 to 11) and 0.06 (95% CI 0.04 to 0.09) and the post-test probabilities were respectively 0.91 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.94) and 0.07 (95% CI 0.04 to 0.10). The overall success rate of saline contrast hysterosonography was 93% (95% CI 92% to 94%). The feasibility of saline contrast hysterosonography in postmenopausal women (success rate 86.5%, 95% CI 83.2 to 89.8) is significantly lower (P < 0.01) compared with premenopausal women (success rate 95%, 95% CI 94% to 96%).
Conclusion:
Saline contrast hysterosonography is accurate in the evaluation of the uterine cavity in pre- and postmenopausal women suffering from abnormal uterine bleeding. The feasibility of saline contrast hysterosonography is high, although significantly better in premenopausal women compared with postmenopausal women. We conclude that saline contrast hysterosonography, in combination with an endometrium aspiration if necessary, can become the standard diagnostic procedure in women with abnormal uterine bleeding.
