{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,4]],"date-time":"2026-05-04T10:46:35Z","timestamp":1777891595523,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"S. Karger AG","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2010,2,26]],"date-time":"2010-02-26T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1267142400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/karger.com\/pages\/terms-and-conditions"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2010,2,26]],"date-time":"2010-02-26T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1267142400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/karger.com\/pages\/terms-and-conditions"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Gynecol Obstet Invest"],"abstract":"<jats:p>A computerized Medline search was conducted, to assess the prognostic value of hysterosalpingography (HSG) and the probability of pregnancy after normal versus abnormal HSG findings. A total of 13 studies turned out to be eligible, reporting on 3,277 women. 15% of women with an abnormal HSG and 32% of women with a normal HSG achieved pregnancy. Sensitivities and specificities of the studies were heterogeneous. The pooled odds ratio was 3 (95% CI: 2.3\u20133.4). Its ROC Curve shows that, at the operating point yielding the lowest number of misclassifications, a sensitivity of 63% and a specificity of 62% is achieved. Seven studies reported unilateral and bilateral obstruction. Odds ratios were 2 (95% CI: 1.5\u20132.6) and 19 (95% CI: 7.5\u201346.5) respectively. So, overall, HSG has a low prognostic value, the outcome of HSG adds little to predicting the occurrence of pregnancy. However, when HSG shows bilateral obstruction, the chance of getting pregnant is only minimal.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1159\/000291826","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2010,3,1]],"date-time":"2010-03-01T04:20:08Z","timestamp":1267417208000},"page":"79-83","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":10,"title":["Pregnancy Rate following Normal versus Abnormal Hysterosalpingography Findings: A Meta-Analysis"],"prefix":"10.1159","author":[{"given":"Jacques W.M.","family":"Maas","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Johannes L.H.","family":"Evers","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Gerbenter","family":"Riet","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Alphons G.H.","family":"Kessels","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"127","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2010,2,26]]},"container-title":["Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/karger.com\/article-pdf\/doi\/10.1159\/000291826","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,5,1]],"date-time":"2026-05-01T06:06:55Z","timestamp":1777615615000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/karger.com\/article\/doi\/10.1159\/000291826"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2010,2,26]]},"references-count":0,"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1159\/000291826","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0378-7346","1423-002X"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0378-7346","type":"print"},{"value":"1423-002X","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2010,2,26]]}}}