Abstract The objective of this study is to test whether vaginoscopic office hysteroscopy (OH) can predict proximal tubal patency as compared with hysterosalpingography
(HSG) and diagnostic laparoscopy (DL) and concomitantly tubal peristalsis in infertile women. This is a prospective cross sectional study. The setting is in the endoscopy unit of a ter-tiary hospital. A total of 85 infertile patients scheduled for laparoscopy are used as the sample of this study. The method used is the vaginoscopic OH in the outpatient infertility clinic to assess proximal tubal patency. The patency results will be compared toHSG andDL reports. Diagnostic accuracy of OH alone or in combination with HSG for assessment of proximal tubal patency in comparison to HSG and DL is the mean
outcome measure. Office hysteroscopic bubble suction test was feasible in 78 cases (91.7%). Patent tubes were diagnosed in 91 and 88.5, 92.3 and 91, and 93.6 and 93.6 % using OH, HSG, and DL on right and left sides, respectively. The per-centage of agreement between OH and DL was 78 % while it was 84 % between HSG and DL regarding tubal patency testing. Diagnostic indices of OH were very close to those of
HSG. Adding OH to HSG did not improve diagnostic accu-racy. Positive osteal peristalsis was reported in 32 cases (42%) and 28 cases (36.8 %) for right and left ostea, respectively. Hysteroscopic bubble suction test is a good initial screening
test for tubal patency nearly comparable to HSG and DL. It should be attempted in every case of OH prior to referral for more invasive HSG or laparoscopic chromopertubation test. Hysteroscopic documentation of peristalsis of the proximal part of the tube is an interesting cofinding but requires more confirmatory studies.