Abstract: Objective：To compare the clinical value of hysteroscopic hydrotubation （HH） and hysterosalpingography （HSG） in tubal infertility diagnosis. Methods：1 452 infertility cases，which was diagnosed from Nov. 2009 to Nov. 2011 in the Affiliated Hospital of the Chinese People′s Armed Forces Logistic College were selected randomly according to the inclusion criteria，and every patient under intravenous anesthesia was treated with HH under the monitor of B ultrasound. Patients suffered from tubal infertility underwent hysteroscopic and laparoscopic operation，and patients whose oviducts were patent were arranged to conceive，and would be examined by hysteroscope and laparoscope one year later if they cannot conceive naturally. The diagnosis rate of HH and HSG will be compared with reference to the result of hysteroscope and laparoscopes operation. Results：The coincidence rate, sensitivity and specificity of HH is 86.1%（2 500/2 904），98.7%（2 370/2 401），and 58.6%（295/503） respectively，and 74.3%（2 130/2 866），93.7%（2 252/2 404），42.4%（196/462） is that of HSG. Statistical difference is found between HSG and HH （P＜0.01）. Conclusions：HH is more accurate when diagnosing tubal patency than HSG，and HH does no obvious harm to patients，and it can observe the abnormality in uterine cavity and treat directly，so HH is superior to HSG on initially diagnosis of tubal infertility.

Key words: Infertility, female, Hysteroscopy, Ethiodized oil, Hysterosalpingography, Fallopian tube obstruction