Cargando…

Comparison of fertility outcomes between oil‑based and water‑based contrast media during hysterosalpingography: A meta‑analysis

Water-based and oil-based contrast media are both widely used in clinical practice for patients receiving hysterosalpingography (HSG). However, minor controversy exists about whether the oil-based contrast medium has a superior fertility-enhancing effect during HSG. The present meta-analysis intende...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Jun, Liu, Shushu, Lu, Jianguo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: D.A. Spandidos 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10443060/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37614430
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12148
_version_ 1785093741570162688
author Chen, Jun
Liu, Shushu
Lu, Jianguo
author_facet Chen, Jun
Liu, Shushu
Lu, Jianguo
author_sort Chen, Jun
collection PubMed
description Water-based and oil-based contrast media are both widely used in clinical practice for patients receiving hysterosalpingography (HSG). However, minor controversy exists about whether the oil-based contrast medium has a superior fertility-enhancing effect during HSG. The present meta-analysis intended to comprehensively compare the fertility outcomes of patients receiving either an oil-based or a water-based contrast medium during HSG. Web of Science, PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database, Cochrane, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and China Science and Technology Journal Database were examined for literature comparing the fertility enhancement between oil-based and water-based contrast media during HSG up to November 10, 2022 and there was no cut off for studies published earlier than any given year. Data for clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, live birth, miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy were extracted and analyzed. A total of 11 studies with 2,462 patients receiving oil-based contrast medium and 2,830 patients receiving water-based contrast medium during HSG were included. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were presented for outcome assessment, and the random effects model was utilized for all analyses. Publication bias was analyzed using Egger's and Begg's tests. The results indicated that the rate of clinical pregnancy was increased using oil-based contrast medium compared with water-based contrast medium [relative risk (RR) (95% CI), 1.29 (1.07, 1.54); P=0.006]. In addition, the rate of ongoing pregnancy [RR (95% CI), 1.39 (1.22, 1.59); P#x003C;0.001] and live birth [RR (95% CI), 1.41 (1.07, 1.87); P=0.016] were also increased using oil-based contrast medium compared with water-based contrast medium. However, miscarriage [RR (95% CI), 1.06 (0.61, 1.86); P=0.833] and ectopic pregnancy [RR (95% CI), 0.66 (0.18, 2.36); P=0.518] were not affected by using oil-based or water-based contrast medium. Begg's test and Egger's test suggested that no publication bias of clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, live birth, miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy existed (all P>0.05), which indicated the stability of the present meta-analysis. In conclusion, the oil-based contrast medium enhances fertility outcomes compared with the water-based contrast medium in patients receiving HSG.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10443060
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher D.A. Spandidos
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-104430602023-08-23 Comparison of fertility outcomes between oil‑based and water‑based contrast media during hysterosalpingography: A meta‑analysis Chen, Jun Liu, Shushu Lu, Jianguo Exp Ther Med Articles Water-based and oil-based contrast media are both widely used in clinical practice for patients receiving hysterosalpingography (HSG). However, minor controversy exists about whether the oil-based contrast medium has a superior fertility-enhancing effect during HSG. The present meta-analysis intended to comprehensively compare the fertility outcomes of patients receiving either an oil-based or a water-based contrast medium during HSG. Web of Science, PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database, Cochrane, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and China Science and Technology Journal Database were examined for literature comparing the fertility enhancement between oil-based and water-based contrast media during HSG up to November 10, 2022 and there was no cut off for studies published earlier than any given year. Data for clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, live birth, miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy were extracted and analyzed. A total of 11 studies with 2,462 patients receiving oil-based contrast medium and 2,830 patients receiving water-based contrast medium during HSG were included. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were presented for outcome assessment, and the random effects model was utilized for all analyses. Publication bias was analyzed using Egger's and Begg's tests. The results indicated that the rate of clinical pregnancy was increased using oil-based contrast medium compared with water-based contrast medium [relative risk (RR) (95% CI), 1.29 (1.07, 1.54); P=0.006]. In addition, the rate of ongoing pregnancy [RR (95% CI), 1.39 (1.22, 1.59); P#x003C;0.001] and live birth [RR (95% CI), 1.41 (1.07, 1.87); P=0.016] were also increased using oil-based contrast medium compared with water-based contrast medium. However, miscarriage [RR (95% CI), 1.06 (0.61, 1.86); P=0.833] and ectopic pregnancy [RR (95% CI), 0.66 (0.18, 2.36); P=0.518] were not affected by using oil-based or water-based contrast medium. Begg's test and Egger's test suggested that no publication bias of clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, live birth, miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy existed (all P>0.05), which indicated the stability of the present meta-analysis. In conclusion, the oil-based contrast medium enhances fertility outcomes compared with the water-based contrast medium in patients receiving HSG. D.A. Spandidos 2023-08-03 /pmc/articles/PMC10443060/ /pubmed/37614430 http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12148 Text en Copyright: © Chen et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Articles
Chen, Jun
Liu, Shushu
Lu, Jianguo
Comparison of fertility outcomes between oil‑based and water‑based contrast media during hysterosalpingography: A meta‑analysis
title Comparison of fertility outcomes between oil‑based and water‑based contrast media during hysterosalpingography: A meta‑analysis
title_full Comparison of fertility outcomes between oil‑based and water‑based contrast media during hysterosalpingography: A meta‑analysis
title_fullStr Comparison of fertility outcomes between oil‑based and water‑based contrast media during hysterosalpingography: A meta‑analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of fertility outcomes between oil‑based and water‑based contrast media during hysterosalpingography: A meta‑analysis
title_short Comparison of fertility outcomes between oil‑based and water‑based contrast media during hysterosalpingography: A meta‑analysis
title_sort comparison of fertility outcomes between oil‑based and water‑based contrast media during hysterosalpingography: a meta‑analysis
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10443060/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37614430
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12148
work_keys_str_mv AT chenjun comparisonoffertilityoutcomesbetweenoilbasedandwaterbasedcontrastmediaduringhysterosalpingographyametaanalysis
AT liushushu comparisonoffertilityoutcomesbetweenoilbasedandwaterbasedcontrastmediaduringhysterosalpingographyametaanalysis
AT lujianguo comparisonoffertilityoutcomesbetweenoilbasedandwaterbasedcontrastmediaduringhysterosalpingographyametaanalysis