Various forms of female infertility were associated with congenital uterine anomalies and acquired uterine disease (
3,
9). In general, TVS as a noninvasive and valuable diagnostic modality plays an important role in the evaluation of uterus and endometrial abnormalities (
3,
10). The objective of this article was to assess the diagnostic value of TVS performed prior to routine hysteroscopy to confirm that TVS could reduce the number of diagnostic hysteroscopies commonly carried out in women with normal uterine cavities. Loverro et al. (
9) and Soares et al. (
11) have reported that TVS had a sensitivity and specificity of as high as (75-85%) and (90-100%), respectively for the detection of endometrial polyps. Using hysteroscopy as a gold standard, TVS showed excellent specificity (91.2%), good sensitivity (88.2%), an 81.4% PPV and a 94.6% NPV in uterine polyp detection in our setting. Likewise, the PPV of TVS for the detection of polyps in our setting was higher than that reported by Soares et al. (
11). While, Fedele and colleagues reported that TVS had a misdiagnosis rate of 4.2% and was therefore less effective in distinguishing polyps than hysteroscopy (
12). In cases of endometrial fibroids, TVS had a sensitivity of 89.2% and a specificity of 99.6%. These findings correlate with the result of Loverro et al. (
9) in which TVS had a 90.9% sensitivity and a 100% specificity for the detection of endometrial fibroids. For the diagnosis of endometrial septum, TVS had a sensitivity of 67% and specificity of 99.8% in patients with a subseptated uterus, while the diagnostic accuracy of TVS is more significant in those patients with a long septum, which showed a sensitivity of 90.9% and specificity of 100% for endometrial long septum. In our study, TVS had 57.1% sensitivity and 100% positive predictive value for unicornuate uterus (
Figure 2). Furthermore, Soares et al.(
11) reported that TVS had a positive predictive value of 100% for uterine malformations detected in hysteroscopy of infertile patients. In this study, TVS failed to distinguish adhesions in 14 out of 21 patients (67%). While Fedele et al. (
12) and Shalev et al. (
3) reported a high accuracy of TVS in diagnosing uterine adhesions. It is recommended that in case of endometrial adhesion detected by sonography, the final diagnosis needs to be confirmed by salin infusion sonography (sonohysterography) which separates the two layers of the endometrium or by diagnostic hysteroscopy. In cases of endometrial hyperplasia, TVS had a sensitivity of 56.2% and a specificity of 99.6%. In this study, all patients were not referred for D & C and only nine cases had a pathologic report. Hyperplasia was approved in three out of nine cases and in six out of nine cases, focal hyperplasia was proved and proliferative endometrium was reported in the pathology test. Sonographic diagnosis of these three cases were correct; thus, endometrial hyperplasia cannot be diagnosed with hysteroscopy alone and the diagnosis of endometrial hyperplasia via hysteroscopy should be approved by a biopsy specimen (
13). Overall, as a test for the detection of intra-uterine abnormalities, TVS had 79% sensitivity and 82% specificity, 84% positive predictive value and 71% negative predictive value in comparison with hysteroscopy. This study showed similar results to Narayan and Goswamy’s study which suggested TVS had a positive predictive value as high as 85-95% for specific uterine abnormalities detected by hysteroscopy in an infertile population (
14). In this study, only histological diagnosis of resected endometrial tissues by hysteroscopy was available and obviously all patients with fibroma or mullerian duct anomalies had no histological results. In spite the fact that the most accurate diagnosis is based on pathological confirmation, the goal of this study was determining the agreement between the results of TVS and hysteroscopy which is determined by direct optic visualization which was the gold standard in the same study (
15). Sonography is a safe, available and inexpensive method with multiple capacities such as 3D, 4D, Doppler studies and saline infusion (sonohysterography) which can properly diagnose uterine pathologies before hysteroscopy. Previous studies have mostly shown that sonohysterography is less invasive than hysteroscopy and in some circumstances may obviate diagnostic hysteroscopy (
16-
18). It may provide a specific diagnosis and enable the surgeon to proceed to operative hysteroscopy. This method is cost-effective, less complicated and less time consuming. It may be a proper alternative for diagnostic hysteroscopy saving more time and may help the surgeon perform the procedure more accurately.We conclude that TVS as a routine procedure before hysteroscopy enables the detection of the details of most localized endometrial lesion.