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

Pregnancy Rate Fallopian Tubes/diagnostic imaging Pain, Procedural Hysterosalpingo foam sonography (HyFoSy) Hysterosalpingography/adverse effects Study Protocol Infertility, Female/diagnostic imaging 0302 clinical medicine Pregnancy Obstetrics and Gynaecology Multicenter Studies as Topic Fallopian Tube Diseases/complications Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Ultrasonography Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Tubal patency testing R HEALTH SURVEY Fallopian Tube Diseases 3. Good health Laparoscopy/adverse effects Randomized controlled trial Fertility work-up Research Design Ongoing pregnancy Female Public aspects of medicine RA1-1270 Pain, Procedural/etiology Infertility, Female Live Birth Adult subfertility Adolescent Reproductive Techniques, Assisted 610 R Medicine Cost effectiveness VALIDATION Hysterosalpingography (HSG) Young Adult 03 medical and health sciences Ovulation Induction SF-36 616 Journal Article Humans ongoing pregnancy cost-effectiveness hysterosalpingography (HSG) Fallopian Tubes Abortion, Spontaneous/etiology Subfertility Gynecology and obstetrics Ultrasonography/adverse effects Hysterosalpingography Abortion, Spontaneous Budget impact budget impact Reproductive Medicine randomized controlled trial RG1-991 Cost-effectiveness Laparoscopy
DOI: 10.1186/s12905-018-0556-6 Publication Date: 2018-05-09T00:56:51Z
ABSTRACT
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.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.This trial will compare the effectiveness and costs of HyFoSy versus HSG in assessing tubal patency in subfertile women.Dutch Trial Register (NTR 4746, http://www.trialregister.nl ). Date of registration: 19 August 2014.
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Coming soon ....
REFERENCES (15)
CITATIONS (22)