Fluoroscopic-guided hysteroscopic tubal cannulation results in high technical success and pregnancy rates comparable with the more traditional laparoscopically guided hysteroscopic tubal cannulation

Objective: To compare women with proximal tubal obstruction (PTO) undergoing hysteroscopic tubal cannulation with fl uoroscopic guidance vs. laparoscopic guidance. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: All fl uoroscopically-guided hysteroscopic tubal cannulations were performed in an ambulatory suite. All laparoscopicallyguided hysteroscopic tubal cannulations were performed in a hospital operating room. Patients: Infertile women with unilateral or bilateral PTO on hysterosalpingography who failed selective salpingography in the radiology suite and had a planned laparoscopy or hysteroscopy in the operating room for defects seen on sonohysterography were studied. Intervention: All women had a Novy catheter system positioned hysteroscopically to cannulate the occluded fallopian tube(s). Women undergoing fl uoroscopically guided hysteroscopic tubal cannulation (FHTC), which used contrast and C-arm pelvic imaging at an ambulatory center, were compared with those undergoing hospital-based laparoscopically guided hysteroscopic tubal cannulation (LHTC) with laparoscopic visualization. Main Outcome Measurements: Tubal cannulation success; bilateral cannulation success; tubal perforations; post-FHTC non-in vitro fertilization (non-IVF) intrauterine pregnancies; days from procedure to pregnancy for non-IVF intrauterine pregnancies; and time to non-IVF pregnancy hazards ratio. Results: A total of 76 infertile women undergoing either FHTC (34 women) or LHTC (42 women) between 2015 and 2019 were included. Demographic variables were similar among the 2 groups. A total of 31 (92%) of 34 of patients undergoing FHTC and 36 (86%) of 42 of patients undergoing LHTC had at least one tube successfully cannulated. In total, 30 (78%) of 34 of patients undergoing FHTC and 32 (79%) of 42 patients undergoing LHTC had all occluded tubes successfully cannulated. Tubal perforation occurred in 1 (3%) of 34 FHTC cases and 3 (7%) of 42 LHTC cases. A similar percentage of non-IVF treatment-induced intrauterine pregnancies were achieved in the FHTC and LHTC groups (10/34 [29%] vs. 12/42 [29%]). Among patients who conceived without IVF, time from procedure to pregnancy was lower in the FHTC group (101 +/- 124.6 days) compared with the LHTC group (228 +/- 216 days). There was a significant difference in time to pregnancy when only those who conceived were considered (hazard ratio, 9.39; 95% confidence interval, 2.42-36.51); however, there was no significant difference when all subjects regardless of pregnancy outcome were analyzed (hazard ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-3.446).