Project

Prospective study of conservative vs surgical approach to vulvodynia

Code
bof/baf/4y/2024/01/524
Duration
01 January 2024 → 31 December 2025
Funding
Regional and community funding: Special Research Fund
Research disciplines
  • Social sciences
    • Medicine, nursing and health curriculum and pedagogics
  • Medical and health sciences
    • Gynaecology
    • Reproductive medicine
    • Gynaecological surgery
Keywords
treatment vestibulectomy vulvodynia
 
Project description

Vulvodynia is a medical condition that impacts the lives of many women but is however often underdiagnosed and mismanaged [1].  In 2015, the ISSVD (International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal Disease) reformulated the definition of vulvodynia to ‘vulvar pain of at least three months’ duration, without clear identifiable cause, which may have potential associated factors’ [2]. Symptoms can be further categorized as localized, generalized (or mixed) and as provoked, spontaneous (or mixed). Provoked localized vulvodynia (PVD) or vestibulodynia is the most frequent cause of vulvar pain with an overall prevalence estimated at 8% to 15% [1,3,4,5]. The condition occurs in all ethnic groups and at any age with a peak incidence between the age of 20 to 29 years [5].  Non-invasive treatments include physiotherapy, psychological coaching or pharmacological treatments with use of neuromodulating agents such as anticonvulsants (e.g. gabapentin, both oral and topical) and antidepressants (e.g. notriptyline) [6]. Surgery is often considered for patients with PVD who are refractory to conservative management [7]. Surgical complications that have previously been reported include (wound) infection, wound dehiscence, hematoma, scarring or increased pain [8]. 

The objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of vestibulectomy for vulvodynia through a prspective study. Randomisation is in this kind of interventional study not possible, however, after unseucesful local therapy, we will give patients two options (systemic medical therapy versus surgery) and will compare pre- and postoperative Nociceptive Rating Scale (NRS) scores at six different points around the vestibule with a Q-tip test as well as the patient satisfaction rates, the surgical complication rates and frequency of relapse.

  1. Reed BD, Harlow SD, Sen A, Legocki LJ, Edwards RM, Arato N, et al. Prevalence and demographic characteristics of vulvodynia in a population-based sample [Internet]. Vol. 206, American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2012. p. 170.e1–170.e9. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.08.012
  2. Bornstein J, Goldstein AT, Stockdale CK, Bergeron S, Pukall C, Zolnoun D, et al. 2015 ISSVD, ISSWSH, and IPPS Consensus Terminology and Classification of Persistent Vulvar Pain and Vulvodynia. J Sex Med. 2016 Apr;13(4):607–12.
  3. Harlow BL, Stewart EG. A population-based assessment of chronic unexplained vulvar pain: have we underestimated the prevalence of vulvodynia? J Am Med Womens Assoc. 2003 Spring;58(2):82–8.
  4. Stenson AL. Vulvodynia: Diagnosis and Management. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2017 Sep;44(3):493–508.
  5. Bautrant E, Porta O, Murina F, Mühlrad H, Levêque C, Riant T, et al. Provoked vulvar vestibulodynia: Epidemiology in Europe, physio-pathology, consensus for first-line treatment and evaluation of second-line treatments. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2019 Oct;48(8):685–8.
  6. Rosen NO, Dawson SJ, Brooks M, Kellogg-Spadt S. Treatment of Vulvodynia: Pharmacological and Non-Pharmacological Approaches. Drugs. 2019 Apr;79(5):483-493.
  7. Tommola P, Unkila-Kallio L, Paavonen J. Surgical treatment of vulvar vestibulitis: a review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010 Nov;89(11):1385–95.
  8. Goldstein AT, Pukall CF, Brown C, Bergeron S, Stein A, Kellogg-Spadt S. Vulvodynia: Assessment and Treatment. J Sex Med. 2016 Apr;13(4):572–90.