A Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial of Vaginal Acidification versus Placebo for the Treatment of Symptomatic Bacterial Vaginosis

Background and Objectives: Vaginal acidification has been suggested as a means of normalizing the vaginal flora. Goal: The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of an acetic acid-based vaginal gel in the treatment of bacterial vaginosis (BV). Study Design: Forty-four patients with...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Sexually transmitted diseases 2004-04, Vol.31 (4), p.236-238
Hauptverfasser: HOLLEY, ROBERT L., RICHTER, HOLLY E., EDWARD, R., PAIR, LISA, SCHWEBKE, JANE R.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background and Objectives: Vaginal acidification has been suggested as a means of normalizing the vaginal flora. Goal: The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of an acetic acid-based vaginal gel in the treatment of bacterial vaginosis (BV). Study Design: Forty-four patients with BV were enrolled in a randomized, double-blind clinic trial. Of these, 29 were evaluable. Patients were randomized to receive either 5 mL acetic acid gel (n = 14) or placebo gel (n = 15) intravaginally twice daily for 7 days. Clinical criteria and vaginal Gram stain scores were compared between the initial visit and at 2 weeks after initiating therapy. Results: No significant differences were noted when comparing drug and placebo in terms of subjective or clinical improvement or improvement in Gram stain smears for bacterial vaginosis. Conclusion: Vaginal acidification with an acetic acid gel formulated to pH 3.9 to 4.1 was ineffective therapy for bacterial vaginosis.
ISSN:0148-5717
1537-4521
DOI:10.1097/01.OLQ.0000118423.20985.E7