Abstract
Computed tomography virtual hysterosalpingography (CT-VHSG) is not exempt from the possibility of diagnostic errors, either by omission or by misinterpretation of the imaging findings. To minimize them and preserve the diagnostic potential and validity of the method, it is essential to be aware of potential pitfalls that may be present in the CT-VHSG exams. Most of them can be prevented or avoided by performing the procedure with adequate preparation and an appropriate standardized technique.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Carrascosa P, Baronio M, Capuñay C, et al. Multidetector computed tomography virtual hysterosalpingography in the investigation of the uterus and fallopian tubes. Eur J Radiol. 2008;67(3):531–5.
Carrascosa P, Baronio M, Capuñay C, et al. Clinical use of 64-row multislice computed tomography hysterosalpingography in the evaluation of female factor infertility. Fertil Steril. 2008;90(5):1953–8.
Norman GR, Eva KW. Diagnostic error and clinical reasoning. Med Educ. 2010;44(1):94–100.
Mamede S, Schmidt HG, Rikers R. Diagnostic errors and reflective practice in medicine. J Eval Clin Pract. 2007;13(1):138–45.
Croskerry P. The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them. Acad Med. 2003;78(8):775–80.
Ubeda B, Paraira M, Alert E, et al. Hysterosalpingography: spectrum of normal variants and nonpathologic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;177(1):131–5.
Ott DJ, Fayez JA. Tubal and adnexal abnormalities. In: Ott DJ, Fayez JA, Zagoria RJ, editors. Hysterosalpingography: a text and atlas. 2nd ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1998. p. 90–3.
Carrascosa PM, Capuñay C, Vallejos J, et al. Virtual hysterosalpingography: a new multidetector CT technique for evaluating the female reproductive system. Radiographics. 2010;30(3):643–61.
Tur-Kaspa I. Hysterosalpingography with a balloon catheter versus a metal cannula: a prospective, randomized, blinded comparative study. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:75–7.
Carrascosa P, Capuñay C, Vallejos J, et al. Virtual hysterosalpingography: experience with over 1000 consecutive patients. Abdom Imaging. 2011;36(1):1–14.
Krysiewicz S. Infertility in women: diagnostic evaluation with hysterosalpingography and other imaging techniques. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1992;159(2):253–61.
Tsili AC, Tsampoulas C, Charisiadi A, et al. Adnexal masses: accuracy of detection and differentiation with multidetector computed tomography. Gynecol Oncol. 2008;110(1):22–31.
Griffin N, Grant LA, Sala E. Adnexal masses: characterization and imaging strategies. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2010;31(5):330–46.
Walsh JW, Amendola MA, Konerding KF, et al. Computed tomographic detection of pelvic and inguinal lymph-node metastases from primary and recurrent pelvic malignant disease. Radiology. 1980;137(1):157–66.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Capuñay, C., Carrascosa, P. (2021). Pitfalls and Incidental Findings. In: Carrascosa, P., Capuñay, C., Mariano Baronio, J., Papier, S. (eds) Clinical Atlas of CT Virtual Hysterosalpingography. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66207-3_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66207-3_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-66206-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-66207-3
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)