Uterine Sounding: Is There a Difference between Blind and Hysteroscopically-Directed Measurements?

Abstract

Abstract Study Objective To evaluate the accuracy of traditional blind uterine sounding in measuring uterine cavity length (UCL), compared with measurement by hysteroscopic guidance. Design A cross-sectional descriptive study (Canadian Task Force classification III). Setting Academic multispecialty medical center. Patients Fifty-eight women undergoing elective hysteroscopic procedures. Intervention UCL measurement. Measurements UCL measurements were obtained by the traditional blind sounding technique and by hysteroscopically directed measurement. Hysteroscopic measurements were assumed to represent true uterine cavity length. Differences between the 2 measurements were calculated to analyze error and bias. Results Mean UCL for blind sounding and hysteroscopically directed measurements were 80.81 mm and 86.55 mm, respectively. The magnitude of error between measurements was >10 mm in 36.2% of cases, with underestimation of true UCL in 55.17% of cases. Conclusion True UCL is underestimated by blind sounding, and the frequency, magnitude, and direction of error may be greater than are clinically acceptable.