Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Women's Health 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Study protocol

The FOAM study: is Hysterosalpingo foam sonography (HyFoSy) a cost-effective alternative for hysterosalpingography (HSG) in assessing tubal patency in subfertile women? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Authors: Joukje van Rijswijk, Nienke van Welie, Kim Dreyer, Machiel H. A. van Hooff, Jan Peter de Bruin, Harold R. Verhoeve, Femke Mol, Kimiko A. Kleiman-Broeze, Maaike A. F. Traas, Guido J. J. M. Muijsers, Arentje P. Manger, Judith Gianotten, Cornelia H. de Koning, Aafke M. H. Koning, Neriman Bayram, David P. van der Ham, Francisca P. J. M. Vrouenraets, Michaela Kalafusova, Bob I. G. van de Laar, Jeroen Kaijser, Miriam F. van Oostwaard, Wouter J. Meijer, Frank J. M. Broekmans, Olivier Valkenburg, Lucy F. van der Voet, Jeroen van Disseldorp, Marieke J. Lambers, Henrike E. Peters, Marit C. I. Lier, Cornelis B. Lambalk, Madelon van Wely, Patrick M. M. Bossuyt, Jaap Stoker, Fulco van der Veen, Ben W. J. Mol, Velja Mijatovic

Published in: BMC Women's Health | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Tubal pathology is a causative factor in 20% of subfertile couples. Traditionally, tubal testing during fertility work-up is performed by hysterosalpingography (HSG). Hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) is a new technique that is thought to have comparable accuracy as HSG, while it is less expensive and more patient friendly. HyFoSy would be an acceptable alternative for HSG, provided it has similar effectiveness in terms of patient outcomes.

Methods/design

We aim to compare the effectiveness and costs of management guided by HyFoSy or by HSG. Consenting women will undergo tubal testing by both HyFoSy and HSG in a randomized order during fertility work-up. The study group will consist of 1163 subfertile women between 18 and 41 years old who are scheduled for tubal patency testing during their fertility work-up. Women with anovulatory cycles not responding to ovulation induction, endometriosis, severe male subfertility or a known contrast (iodine) allergy will be excluded. We anticipate that 7 % (N = 82) of the participants will have discordant test results for HyFoSy and HSG. These participants will be randomly allocated to either a management strategy based on HyFoSy or a management strategy based on HSG, resulting in either a diagnostic laparoscopy with chromopertubation or a strategy that assumes tubal patency (intrauterine insemination or expectant management). The primary outcome is ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth within 12 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes are patient pain scores, time to pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage rate, multiple pregnancy rate, preterm birth rate and number of additional treatments. Costs will be estimated by counting resource use and calculating unit prices.

Discussion

This trial will compare the effectiveness and costs of HyFoSy versus HSG in assessing tubal patency in subfertile women.

Trial registration

Dutch Trial Register (NTR 4746, http://​www.​trialregister.​nl). Date of registration: 19 August 2014.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Thoma ME, AC ML, Louis JF, King RB, Trumble AC, Sundaram R, et al. Prevalence of infertility in the United States as estimated by the current duration approach and a traditional constructed approach. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(5):1324–31 e1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Thoma ME, AC ML, Louis JF, King RB, Trumble AC, Sundaram R, et al. Prevalence of infertility in the United States as estimated by the current duration approach and a traditional constructed approach. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(5):1324–31 e1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Dijkman AB, Mol BW, van der Veen F, Bossuyt PM, Hogerzeil HV. Can hysterosalpingocontrast-sonography replace hysterosalpingography in the assessment of tubal subfertility? Eur J Radiol. 2000;35(1):44–8.CrossRefPubMed Dijkman AB, Mol BW, van der Veen F, Bossuyt PM, Hogerzeil HV. Can hysterosalpingocontrast-sonography replace hysterosalpingography in the assessment of tubal subfertility? Eur J Radiol. 2000;35(1):44–8.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Reis MM, Soares SR, Cancado ML, Camargos AF. Hysterosalpingo contrast sonography (HyCoSy) with SH U 454 (Echovist) for the assessment of tubal patency. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(11):3049–52.CrossRefPubMed Reis MM, Soares SR, Cancado ML, Camargos AF. Hysterosalpingo contrast sonography (HyCoSy) with SH U 454 (Echovist) for the assessment of tubal patency. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(11):3049–52.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Emanuel MH, Exalto N. Hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy): a new technique to visualize tubal patency. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;37(4):498–9.CrossRefPubMed Emanuel MH, Exalto N. Hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy): a new technique to visualize tubal patency. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;37(4):498–9.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Dreyer K, Out R, Hompes PG, Mijatovic V. Hysterosalpingo-foam sonography, a less painful procedure for tubal patency testing during fertility workup compared with (serial) hysterosalpingography: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(3):821–5.CrossRefPubMed Dreyer K, Out R, Hompes PG, Mijatovic V. Hysterosalpingo-foam sonography, a less painful procedure for tubal patency testing during fertility workup compared with (serial) hysterosalpingography: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2014;102(3):821–5.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Emanuel MH, van Vliet M, Weber M, Exalto N. First experiences with hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) for office tubal patency testing. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(1):114–7.CrossRefPubMed Emanuel MH, van Vliet M, Weber M, Exalto N. First experiences with hysterosalpingo-foam sonography (HyFoSy) for office tubal patency testing. Hum Reprod. 2012;27(1):114–7.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Van Schoubroeck D, Van den Bosch T, Meuleman C, Tomassetti C, D'Hooghe T, Timmerman D. The use of a new gel foam for the evaluation of tubal patency. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 2013;75(3):152–6.CrossRef Van Schoubroeck D, Van den Bosch T, Meuleman C, Tomassetti C, D'Hooghe T, Timmerman D. The use of a new gel foam for the evaluation of tubal patency. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 2013;75(3):152–6.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Bossuyt PM, Lijmer JG, Mol BW. Randomised comparisons of medical tests: sometimes invalid, not always efficient. Lancet. 2000;356(9244):1844–7.CrossRefPubMed Bossuyt PM, Lijmer JG, Mol BW. Randomised comparisons of medical tests: sometimes invalid, not always efficient. Lancet. 2000;356(9244):1844–7.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Hunault CC, Laven JS, van Rooij IA, Eijkemans MJ, te Velde ER, Habbema JD. Prospective validation of two models predicting pregnancy leading to live birth among untreated subfertile couples. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(6):1636–41.CrossRefPubMed Hunault CC, Laven JS, van Rooij IA, Eijkemans MJ, te Velde ER, Habbema JD. Prospective validation of two models predicting pregnancy leading to live birth among untreated subfertile couples. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(6):1636–41.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Aaronson NK, Muller M, Cohen PD, Essink-Bot ML, Fekkes M, Sanderman R, et al. Translation, validation, and norming of the Dutch language version of the SF-36 health survey in community and chronic disease populations. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(11):1055–68.CrossRefPubMed Aaronson NK, Muller M, Cohen PD, Essink-Bot ML, Fekkes M, Sanderman R, et al. Translation, validation, and norming of the Dutch language version of the SF-36 health survey in community and chronic disease populations. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(11):1055–68.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30(6):473–83.CrossRefPubMed Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30(6):473–83.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference van Roijen L, Essink-Bot ML, Koopmanschap MA, Bonsel G, Rutten FF. Labor and health status in economic evaluation of health care. The health and labor questionnaire. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1996;12(3):405–15.CrossRefPubMed van Roijen L, Essink-Bot ML, Koopmanschap MA, Bonsel G, Rutten FF. Labor and health status in economic evaluation of health care. The health and labor questionnaire. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1996;12(3):405–15.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Lu B, Gatsonis C. Efficiency of study designs in diagnostic randomized clinical trials. Stat Med. 2013;32:1451–66.CrossRefPubMed Lu B, Gatsonis C. Efficiency of study designs in diagnostic randomized clinical trials. Stat Med. 2013;32:1451–66.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Dreyer K, van Rijswijk J, Mijatovic V, Goddijn M, Verhoeve HR, van Rooij IAJ, et al. Oil-based or water-based contrast for Hysterosalpingography in infertile women. NEJM. May 2017;2017(25):2043–52.CrossRef Dreyer K, van Rijswijk J, Mijatovic V, Goddijn M, Verhoeve HR, van Rooij IAJ, et al. Oil-based or water-based contrast for Hysterosalpingography in infertile women. NEJM. May 2017;2017(25):2043–52.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The FOAM study: is Hysterosalpingo foam sonography (HyFoSy) a cost-effective alternative for hysterosalpingography (HSG) in assessing tubal patency in subfertile women? Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Authors
Joukje van Rijswijk
Nienke van Welie
Kim Dreyer
Machiel H. A. van Hooff
Jan Peter de Bruin
Harold R. Verhoeve
Femke Mol
Kimiko A. Kleiman-Broeze
Maaike A. F. Traas
Guido J. J. M. Muijsers
Arentje P. Manger
Judith Gianotten
Cornelia H. de Koning
Aafke M. H. Koning
Neriman Bayram
David P. van der Ham
Francisca P. J. M. Vrouenraets
Michaela Kalafusova
Bob I. G. van de Laar
Jeroen Kaijser
Miriam F. van Oostwaard
Wouter J. Meijer
Frank J. M. Broekmans
Olivier Valkenburg
Lucy F. van der Voet
Jeroen van Disseldorp
Marieke J. Lambers
Henrike E. Peters
Marit C. I. Lier
Cornelis B. Lambalk
Madelon van Wely
Patrick M. M. Bossuyt
Jaap Stoker
Fulco van der Veen
Ben W. J. Mol
Velja Mijatovic
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Women's Health / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6874
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-018-0556-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

BMC Women's Health 1/2018 Go to the issue