Beyond vulvodynia: from a correct diagnosis to a multidisciplinary care program. A referral center experience.

BACKGROUND: Vulvodynia is a chronic pain condition without an identifiable cause. As such, it is a diagnosis of exclusion, and all other causes of vulvar pain should be excluded. Although a standard treatment for vulvodynia has not been established yet, multidisciplinary care programs appear to be effective. PUROPOSE: The aim of this retrospective monocentric study was to analyze the prevalence of vulvodynia among women referred to our institution for a suspected diagnosis and to evaluate the efficacy of a multidimensional treatment plan. The primary outcome was the prevalence of vulvodynia following differential diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included: prevalence of the differential diagnoses, symptom resolution rate following treatment, and the relation between persistence of symptoms and (a) patients' age; (b) coexisting chronic overlapping pain conditions (COPCs). RESULTS: After having ruled out all other causes of vulvar pain, only 40.1% of women were considered as affected by vulvodynia. The most frequent differential diagnoses included lower genital tract infections (25.3%), vulvar lichen sclerosus (17.6%) and vulvovaginal atrophy (8.2%). Following a multidisciplinary care program, resolution of symptoms was observed in 13.6% cases, improvement in 64.3% and persistence in 21.9%. We did not find a statistically significant association between persistence of symptoms and age > 38 years (OR 2.10; p = 0.30). Women with one or more COPCs other than vulvodynia had a 75% increased risk of not obtaining a resolution of symptoms (OR 1.75; p = 0.44). CONCLUSION: A thorough differential diagnosis and a multidisciplinary care program may represent a first way out of the muddle in the management of these patients.

Monitoring the activities of Italian colposcopy clinics before and during the COVID-19 pandemic / 부인종양

Objective@#To evaluate the impact of healthcare reorganization during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic on Italian colposcopy clinic activities, focusing on cervical excision procedures, follow-ups for conservative management of low-grade lesions, and follow-ups post cervical excision. @*Methods@#Retrospective study conducted in 14 Italian colposcopy clinics. The number and clinical characteristics of cervical excisions, follow-ups for conservative management of low-grade lesions, and follow-ups after cervical excision were compared between the period March 1, 2019 to February 29, 2020 (pre-pandemic) and March 1, 2020 to February 28, 2021 (pandemic) with a Poisson regression analysis. @*Results@#In the pandemic period, the number of cervical excisions was reduced by 8.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]=−15.6% to −2%; p=0.011). Excisions were less frequently performed in the operating room (−35.1%; 95% CI=−47.6% to −22.6%; p<0.001), the number of patients from spontaneous screening was reduced by −14.0% (95% CI=−23.4% to −4.6%; p=0.003), and the CO2-laser technique was used less frequently (−30%; 95% CI=−45.1% to −15.0%; p<0.001). As compared to the pre-pandemic period, the number of follow-ups for conservative management of low-grade lesions was reduced by −26.7% (95% CI=−39.0% to −14.4%; p<0.001), and the follow-up appointments after cervical excision were reduced by −51.0% (95% CI=−58.1% to −43.9%; p<0.001). @*Conclusion@#The most significant impact of the healthcare reorganization during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic was on follow-ups after cervical excision. The resumption of disrupted activities should follow a risk-based prioritization, starting from women in follow-up after cervical excision. It is advisable that the trend of performing cervical excision as an outpatient procedure is maintained in the post-pandemic period.