Transvaginal sonography combined with saline contrast sonohysterography to evaluate the uterine cavity in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding and postmenopausal endometrium more than 5 mm.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether saline contrast sonohysterography (SCSH) gives additional information to that obtained by transvaginal sonography (TVS) for predicting endometrial abnormality in premenopausal, menopausal and postmenopausal patients with abnormal uterine bleeding and postmenopausal patients with endometrial thickness > 5 mm.

METHODS: This was a prospective study at the Ege University Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic in Izmir, Turkey. Patients presenting with abnormal bleeding related to uterine pathologies, postmenopausal patients with endometrial thickness more than 5 mm and scheduled for surgical treatment were prospectively included in our study conducted between 1 July, 2000 and 31 January, 2002. The uterine cavity was first evaluated with TVS in 53 premenopausal, menopausal, postmenopausal patients with abnormal uterine bleeding and postmenopausal patients whose endometrial thickness was > 5 mm measured by conventional ultrasound examination. SCSH was carried out later with the intention of establishing further surgical management (hysterectomy). Twenty of the patients had operative hysterectomy within the 1.5 year period of time. The presence of focally growing lesions and the type of lesion (endometrial polyp, submucous myoma, malignancy or unclear focal lesion) were noted at ultrasound examination and at hysteroscopy, and then hysterectomy material was examined by Ege University's Pathology Department which provided a detailed evaluation of the uterine cavity.

RESULTS: Based on normal endometrial morphology alone, the results for detection of an abnormal uterine cavity were as follows: sensitivity of TVS 0.94, SCSH 0.97; specificity of TVS 0.56, SCSH 0.62; positive predictive value of TVS 0.79, SCSH 0.81; negative predictive value of TVS 0.83, SCSH 0.93. Transvaginal sonography combined with SCSH was superior to TVS for detection of intracavitary abnormalities. When normal endometrial morphology was combined with an endometrial thickness of < 12 mm for evaluation of all abnormalities including hyperplasia, the diagnostic potential of TVS or SCSH was almost unchanged. Transvaginal sonography missed 24% of the polyps.

CONCLUSIONS: Sonohysterography was a sensitive tool and was superior to TVS used alone for evaluation of the uterine cavity in patients who underwent operative surgery for abnormal uterine bleeding.