A comparison was made between oil-contrast hysterosalpingogram (HSG) with 1-hour follow-up radiograph and the traditional 24-hour follow-up radiograph with respect to detection of tubal patency and pelvic adhesive disease. The results on either modality were assessed by subsequent laparoscopy. The 1-hour HSG was comparable to the 24-hour HSG in defining tubal patency. Even though it was inferior to the 24-hour HSG with respect to identifying pelvic adhesions, it may serve as an adequate substitute to the above since the sensitivity of the HSG in identifying adhesions is low and has little influence on the clinical decision process in the evaluation of infertility.