@kmbegs @cornflakes86 @cakebytheoceon @MK85 thank you ❤That does give me some hope!
@Poppiesway1 that's really interesting, thank you! HyFoSy does seem like an improvement (not currently available at the clinic I'm at though 😕) and there are definite downsides to HSG. When you say "HyCoSy and HSG had similar conception rate afterwards", I guess there wasn't a control group to check whether they were any better than no intervention at all?
@jessie92 this is super encouraging. Also frustrating / tantalising though - those are such specific numbers, it makes me feel this must come from a study which should be published and findable. I guess not all scientific journals are available publically so I maybe that's how I'm missing something.
Overall I guess this is the first time I've had to use private medicine, and infertility is obviously such an emotional issue, that I'm wary of being taken advantage of / losing perspective in the fog of TTC. Or spending £450 on a test which I should just save up for IVF.
On the other hand, maybe £450 for a possible increased chance of conceiving naturally is worth the gamble, if it might avoid about the stress / cost of IVF. 😣
*
For anyone interested in what I managed to track down, I asked a friend who works in biotech and has access to more journals to have a look, and this summary of different papers was the most useful thing they
could find: Clinical Aspects of HyFoSy as Tubal Patency Test in Subfertility Workup - Table 1 - Enhancing Chance of Pregnancy
The studies range across HyFoSy, HSG and HyCoSy.
Of the two papers focussed on HyCoSy, the one with the larger number of participants (334) concluded there was "no enhanced pregnancy rate", and the one with the smaller number of participants (180) concluded "A possible beneficial effect of HyCoSy is feasible especially in the days following its execution" and noted a 45% pregnancy rate in the first 30 days. A possible glimmer of hope I guess, but I would tend to believe the study with the larger number of participants.