Abstract
Background
Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is a common condition, yet accurate diagnosis remains a challenge. We explored symptom and microscopy-based diagnosis of BV and assessed the influence of these diagnostic approaches on treatment response.
Methods
BV diagnosis based on patient-reported symptoms, and vaginal swab gram stain microscopy at local laboratories and a central laboratory were compared for women recruited into the VITA trial in England. Multivariable analysis was used to assess the association between the method of diagnosis and symptom resolution 2 weeks after metronidazole treatment.
Results
517 women presenting with vaginal discharge (470/517 [91%]) and/or malodour (440/517 [85%]) were included. The accuracy of patients’ vaginal symptoms compared to local laboratory microscopy for BV diagnosis were —discharge, sensitivity 90% and specificity 5%; malodour, sensitivity 84% and specificity 12%, and compared to a central laboratory diagnosis were —discharge, sensitivity 91% and specificity 8%; malodour, sensitivity 88% and specificity 18%. 143/204 (70%) participants reported symptom resolution after treatment and this was associated with a positive baseline local laboratory diagnosis (adjusted relative risk—aRR 1.64 [1.02 to 2.64]), but not with a positive central laboratory diagnosis (aRR 1.14 [0.95 to 1.37]). Symptom resolution occurred in 75% (83/111) of women who were symptom positive/central laboratory BV positive compared to 65% (58/89) who were symptom positive/microscopy negative.
Conclusion
Symptoms correlated poorly with microscopy-based BV diagnosis but two-thirds of women with a symptom positive/microscopy negative diagnosis experienced symptom resolution following metronidazole treatment. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal investigation and treatment for microscopy-negative women with typical BV symptoms.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
