Comparison of cervical vacuum cup cannula with metal cannula for hysterosalpingography

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to compare the use of a cervical vacuum cap cannula with the traditional metal cannula.

Design A prospective, randomised, single-blinded comparative study.

Sample Fifty consecutive infertile women undergoing hysterosalpingography for evaluation of infertility

Methods Hysterosalpingography was performed either with the traditional metal cannula (n=25) or a cervical vacuum cap cannula (n=25).

Main outcome measures Length of procedure, fluoroscopic time, amount of contrast medium, pain to the patient while applying the cannula and injecting the contrast medium, level of difficulty to the performer, the need to reapply the cannula, complications, and results of the hysterosalpingography.

Results Using the cervical vacuum cap cannula, compared with the metal cannula, the duration of the procedure was significantly shorter (5.3 vs 9.3 minutes; P<0.001), less fluoroscopic time was needed (0.9 vs 1.8 minutes; P<0.001), a smaller amount of contrast medium was used (4.6 vs 15.7 mL; P<0.001), the procedure caused less pain to the patient (3.2 vs 6.8, respectively; on a scale of 1–10; P<0.001), and was easier for the physician to perform (1.4 vs 3.4; on a scale of 1–10; P<0.001). No significant differences were encountered between the two groups in the need to reapply the cannula, in the rate of complications or in the results of the hysterosalpingography.

Conclusions The cervical cap cannula appears to be superior to the traditional metal cannula for performing hysterosalpingography.