Pharmacotherapy for the treatment of vaginal atrophy

Introduction: Despite its frequency, recognition and therapy of vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) remain suboptimal. Wet mount microscopy, or vaginal pH as a proxy, allows VVA diagnosis in menopause, but also in young contraception users, after breast cancer, or postpartum. Intravaginal low dose estrogen product is the main therapy. Ultra-low-dose vaginal estriol is safe and sufficient in most cases, even in breast cancer patients, while hyaluronic acid can help women who cannot or do not want to use hormones.

Areas covered: The authors provide an overview of the current pharmaceutical treatment for vulvovaginal atrophy and provide their expert opinions on its future treatment.

Expert opinion: The basis of good treatment is a correct and complete diagnosis, using a microscope to study the maturity index of the vaginal fluid. Minimal dose of estriol intravaginally with or without lactobacilli is elegant, cheap and can safely be used after breast cancer and history of thromboembolic disease. Laser therapy requires validation and safety data, as is can potentially cause vaginal fibrosis and stenosis, and safer and cheaper alternatives are available.     

Non‐response to fluconazole maintenance treatment (ReCiDiF regimen) for recurrent vulvovaginal candidosis is not related to impaired glucose metabolism

Is non‐response to maintenance treatment for recurrent vulvovaginal candidosis (RCVV) related to the impaired glucose metabolism? In the ReCiDiF trial, women with RCVV were given a degressive regimen with fluconazole according to their clinical, microscopic and mycologic response. Data obtained from optimal, suboptimal and non‐reponding patients were used for secondary analysis of medical history, physical status and family history for potential glucose impairment. Results were presented in means and percentages. Pearson chi‐square, Fisher exact, Mann‐Whitney U, Kruskal‐Wallis and Spearman's correlation coefficient was calculated. P<.05 were interpreted as statistically significant. Sociodemographic characteristics and family and personal history of diabetes were not different between optimal, suboptimal and non‐responders. The average HbA1c concentration was 5.1±0.3% in optimal, 5.0±0.4% in sub‐optimal, and 5.1±0.3% in non‐responding patients (P=1.0). There are no statistical differences between optimal, sub‐optimal and non‐respondents to treatment in all deciles of HbA1c among patients with recurrent candidosis (P=1.0). There was no difference among groups in fasting glucose concentration, nor after 30 min, 60 min or 120 min during the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) (P=.6). Area under the OGTT curve did not differ within groups (P=.8), nor was the deviation from the normal cut‐off value any different (P=.8). Glucose concentration in vaginal rinsing fluid showed no correlation with responsiveness to treatment (P=.7). Glucose metabolism, BMI, personal or family history of diabetes are not related to non‐response to maintenance treatment with fluconazole for patients with RVVC.