You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Miscellaneous
Letter
Methods of assessing tubal patency
  1. Anushree Jagadambe1,
  2. Pippa Oakeshott2,
  3. Kamal Ojha3,
  4. Phillip E Hay4
  1. 1Medical student, Population Health Sciences and Education, St George's, University of London, London, UK
  2. 2Reader in General Practice, Population Health Sciences and Education, St George's, University of London, London, UK
  3. 3Consultant Gynaecologist, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, St George's Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
  4. 4Reader in Genitourinary Medicine, Courtyard Genitourinary Medicine Clinic, St George's Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Pippa Oakeshott, Population Health Sciences and Education, St George's, University of London, London SW17 ORE, UK; oakeshot{at}sgul.ac.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2012-050559

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Bender and colleagues found that relationships between levels of chlamydia infection and complication rates of pelvic inflammatory disease and ectopic pregnancy between and within countries over time were not straightforward.1 Many women diagnosed with a chlamydial infection are anxious about future fertility. Fertiloscopy is a novel procedure to assess fallopian tube function and may be a suitable alternative to the gold standard diagnostic of laparoscopy.2 It is done under local anaesthesia and may involve transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy, methylene blue dye test, salpingoscopy, microsalpingoscopy and hysteroscopy. The main feature of fertiloscopy is that it allows an optical device to be introduced into the tubal ostium to bilaterally explore the tubal mucosa. Optical magnification …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.