Skip to main content

Table 2 Diagnostic accuracy of HSG compared with hysteroscopy ± laparoscopy in diagnosing female genital tract congenital anomalies

From: The Thessaloniki ESHRE/ESGE consensus on diagnosis of female genital anomalies

Study

Cases (n)

Sensitivity

Specificity

PPV

NPV

Accuracy

Bocca et al. [6]

125

50

94

71

87

76

Ludwin et al. [37]

83

77

100

100

35

78

De Felice et al. [14]

208

100

100

100

100

100

Momtaz et al. [44]

38

95

78

65

97

84

Guimaraes Filho et al. [30]

54

63

98

83

94

85

Valenzano et al. [58]

54

91

100

100

94

96

Traina et al. [57]

80

100

97

85

100

96

Alborzi et al. [3]

186

70

92

83

88

83

Preutthipan and Linasmita [48]

336

100

97

69

100

92

Brown et al. [7]

46

100

100

100

100

100

Soares et al. [55]

65

44

96

67

92

75

Alatas et al. [2]

62

100

100

100

100

100

Garglione 1997

70

100

100

100

100

100

Goldberg et al. [23]

32

100

100

100

100

100

Keltz et al. [34]

18

90

20

53

67

58

Raziel et al. [51]

60

74

59

62

72

67

Mean (95 % CI)

 

84.6 (74.4–94.9)

89.4 (80.0–100)

83.6 (74.6–92.6)

89.1 (79.7–98.5)

86.9 (79.8–94.0)

  1. HSG hysterosalpingogram, PPV positive predictive value, NPV negative predictive value, CI confidence interval