The Relationship Between Vulvovaginal Candidiasis and Provoked Vulvodynia: A Systematic Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Provoked vulvodynia (PVD) is a chronic vulvar pain condition affecting up to 8.3% of the female population. Despite many years of research, no clear cause for PVD has been identified. Several risk factors have been studied, including vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC). However, to date, the role of Candida infections in PVD has remained unclear. VVC and PVD have an overlap of symptoms that may contribute to diagnostic inaccuracy and mistreatment. AIM: To systematically review the literature on the relationship between VVC and PVD. METHODS: Cohort and case-control studies were included that compared women with PVD with healthy controls with respect to the presence of a history of Candida vulvovaginitis. PVD had to be diagnosed by Friedrich's criteria or the International Society for the Study of Vulvovaginal Disease criteria. The inclusion process as well as the quality appraisal of the studies, using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale, were performed independently by 2 authors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Outcomes of the population-based case-control studies were listed as odds ratio. Outcomes of the pathophysiological studies were based on local pro-inflammatory responses on Candida in vitro. RESULTS: We included a total of 14 studies, both population and clinic-based case-control, and pathophysiological research. 7 studies were of low methodological quality, and 7 studies were of medium methodological quality. The population-based case-control studies showed a significantly increased odds ratio for self-reported VVC in PVD cases compared with controls. The pathophysiological studies revealed a tendency for an increased local proinflammatory response on Candida in vitro in patients with PVD. Owing to the substantial heterogeneity of the studies, meta-analysis was not performed. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Health care providers may consider a diagnosis of PVD in women with self-reported VVC, and to act on this properly. Reiteration of antifungal prescriptions by physicians without a decent diagnosis, will lead to mistreatment. Women should be informed by their health care provider that intercourse during (or shortly after) the treatment of VVC might worsen the vulnerability of the vulvar skin. STRENGTH AND LIMITATIONS: This is the first systematic review performed to describe the relation between VVC and PVD. An independently performed in- and exclusion process and quality appraisal, ensured optimal internal validity. However, there were important methodological limitations and the size of heterogeneity prevented establishing a meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: This systematic review is unable to draw conclusions regarding a relationship between actual VVC and PVD because studies were based on self-reported VVC. Until new evidence becomes available, we advocate that PVD should be considered as an unexplained chronic pain condition. In women with recurrent or persistent VVC-like complaints, physicians should consider a diagnosis of PVD. Leusink P, van de Pasch S, Teunissen D, et al. The Relationship Between Vulvovaginal Candidiasis and Provoked Vulvodynia: A Systematic Review. J Sex Med 2018;15:1310-1321.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,008 | 0,038 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,009 | 0,007 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,013 | 0,013 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».