Which is less harmful, angiography or perfusion?

Many women cannot get pregnant for a long time. At this time, they need to check their fallopian tubes, mainly because they are afraid of fallopian tube blockage. The two most common methods of examining the fallopian tubes are hysterosalpingography and tubal perfusion. Both examination methods will have a certain impact on the female body. As a patient, you must choose the one with less harm. So, which one is less harmful, angiography or fluid perfusion? Let’s take a look below.

What is angiography?

Hysterosalpingography is one of the most widely used methods for examining female fallopian tubes in clinical practice. Contrast agent is injected into the uterine cavity through a catheter, and X-ray fluoroscopy and filming are performed using an X-ray diagnostic device to understand the state of the female fallopian tubes, whether they are unobstructed or blocked, and to determine whether it has an impact on infertility based on the examination results.

What is fluid perfusion?

Fallopian tube insufflation is a relatively simple method to treat fallopian tube obstruction. Methylene blue solution or normal saline is injected from the cervix, passes through the uterine cavity, and then flows into the fallopian tube. This process requires a high level of technical skills from the doctor, because the doctor will judge whether the fallopian tube is unobstructed based on the resistance to the injected fluid, the presence or absence of reflux, and the patient's pain sensation.

Which one is less harmful, angiography or fluid perfusion?

Hysterosalpingography has been used for a long time, and the requirements for equipment are very low. It is also relatively simple to operate. However, hysterosalpingography is a blind procedure. During the procedure, the specific progress of the injected fluid in the patient's body cannot be seen, and the location and nature of the fallopian tube obstruction cannot be determined. Therefore, the accuracy of the hysterosalpingography examination is not very high, and it is not very useful for further treatment. During hysterosalpingography, doctors can clearly see the location and nature of the blockage, so it has a high accuracy rate and always remains at the forefront of the industry. It also has a certain therapeutic effect on some mild fallopian tube adhesions.

In summary: compared with angiography and hydrosalpingography, salpingography causes less damage and the patient recovers faster. It is currently a commonly used examination method to understand whether the fallopian tubes are unobstructed, the degree of patency and the specific location of blockage. Although the water-passing operation is simple and easy to perform, it has a low accuracy rate and cannot determine the problems with the fallopian tubes. If it is performed improperly, it will not only cause damage to the body, but may also cause inflammation.