Laboratorial Aspects of Cytolytic Vaginosis and Vulvovaginal Candidiasis as a Key for Accurate Diagnosis: A Pilot Study

Abstract

Objective To identify clinical, microscopic, and biochemical characteristics that differentiate cytolytic vaginosis (CV) from vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC).

Methods The present cross-sectional study analyzed the vaginal contents of 24 non-pregnant women aged 18 to 42 years who were attended at the Genital Infections Clinic at Centro de Atenção Integral à Saúde da Mulher da Universidade Estadual de Campinas (CAISM-UNICAMP). They were diagnosed either with (CV = 8, VVC = 8) or without vulvovaginitis or vaginal dysbiosis (controls). The socio-demographic, clinical, and gynecological data were obtained from a detailed patient interview. Samples of the vaginal contents were collected for analysis of vaginal pH, gram stain, and specific fungal culture. The Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher exact tests were used to compare the differences between the groups. Odds ratios were used to compare the categorical variables. The significance level was considered at p < 0.05.

Results Both women with CV and VVC had a lumpy vaginal discharge (p = 0,002) and vaginal hyperemia (p = 0.001), compared with controls. The inflammatory process was more intense in the VVC group (p = 0.001). In the CV group, there was statistical significance for the lactobacillus amount (p = 0.006), vaginal epithelium lysis (p = 0.001), and vaginal pH (p = 0.0002).

Conclusion Cytolytic vaginosis and VVC diagnoses rarely differ on clinical characteristics but have different laboratorial findings. The present study highlights the importance of conducting an accurate investigation through laboratory tests rather than clinical criteria to avoid misdiagnosis.

Resumo

Objetivo Identificar características clínicas, microscópicas e bioquímicas que diferenciam a vaginose citolítica (VC) da candidíase vulvovaginal (CVV).

Métodos O presente estudo de corte transversal analisou o conteúdo vaginal de 24 mulheres não grávidas, com idades entre 18 e 42 anos, atendidas no ambulatório de Infecções Genitais do Centro de Atenção Integral à Saúde da Mulher da Universidade Estadual de Campinas (CAISM-UNICAMP). Elas foram diagnosticadas com (CV = 8, CVV = 8) ou sem vulvovaginite ou disbiose vaginal (controles = 8). Os dados sociodemográficos, clínicos e ginecológicos foram obtidos em uma entrevista detalhada do paciente. Amostras do conteúdo vaginal foram coletadas para análise do pH vaginal, coloração de Gram e cultura específica de fungos. Os testes exatos de Kruskal-Wallis e Fisher foram utilizados para comparar as diferenças entre os grupos. A razão de chances foi utilizada para comparar as variáveis categóricas. O nível de significância considerado foi de p < 0,05.

Resultados As mulheres com VC e CVV apresentaram corrimento vaginal irregular (p = 0,002) e hiperemia vaginal (p = 0,001), em comparação aos controles. O processo inflamatório foi mais intenso no grupo CVV (p = 0,001). No grupo VC, houve significância estatística para a quantidade de lactobacilos (p = 0,006), lise do epitélio vaginal (p = 0,001) e pH vaginal (p = 0,0002).

Conclusão Os diagnósticos de VC e CVV raramente diferem nas características clínicas, mas apresentam achados laboratoriais diferentes. O presente estudo destaca a importância de conduzir uma investigação precisa por meio de testes laboratoriais, em vez de critérios apenas clínicos, a fim de evitar erros de diagnóstico.

Keywords

cytolytic vaginosis - dysbiosis - gram stain - vaginal bacterioscopy - vulvovaginal candidiasis

Palavras-chave

vaginose citolítica - disbiose - coloração de Gram - bacterioscopia vaginal - candidíase vulvovaginal

Contributions

J. M. S.: Design, collection, analysis and interpretation of the data and writing of the article; P. C. G. design and data analysis and final revision. M. B. data analysis; R. A. collection and interpretation of the data; M. G. D. writing and revision of the article; L. R. data analysis and final revision.

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 20. Januar 2020

Angenommen: 29. Juni 2020

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
31. Oktober 2020

• References

• 1 Gonçalves B, Ferreira C, Alves CT, Henriques M, Azeredo J, Silva S. Vulvovaginal candidiasis: Epidemiology, microbiology and risk factors. Crit Rev Microbiol 2016; 42 (06) 905-927 DOI: 10.3109/1040841x.2015.1091805.
• 2 Blostein F, Levin-Sparenberg E, Wagner J, Foxman B. Recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis. Ann Epidemiol 2017; 27 (09) 575-582.e3 DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2017.08.010.
• 3 Zeng X, Zhang Y, Zhang T, Xue Y, Xu H, An R. Risk factors of vulvovaginal candidiasis among women of reproductive age in Xi'an: a cross-sectional study. BioMed Res Int 2018; 2018: 9703754 DOI: 10.1155/2018/9703754.
• 4 Foxman B, Barlow R, D'Arcy H, Gillespie B, Sobel JD. Urinary tract infection: self-reported incidence and associated costs. Ann Epidemiol 2000; 10 (08) 509-515 DOI: 10.1016/s1047-2797(00)00072-7.
• 5 Foxman B, Muraglia R, Dietz JP, Sobel JD, Wagner J. Prevalence of recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis in 5 European countries and the United States: results from an internet panel survey. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2013; 17 (03) 340-345 DOI: 10.1097/LGT.0b013e318273e8cf.
• 6 Corsello S, Spinillo A, Osnengo G, Penna C, Guaschino S, Beltrame A. et al. An epidemiological survey of vulvovaginal candidiasis in Italy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2003; 110 (01) 66-72 DOI: 10.1016/s0301-2115(03)00096-4.
• 7 Richter SS, Galask RP, Messer SA, Hollis RJ, Diekema DJ, Pfaller MA. Antifungal susceptibilities of Candida species causing vulvovaginitis and epidemiology of recurrent cases. J Clin Microbiol 2005; 43 (05) 2155-2162 DOI: 10.1128/jcm.43.5.2155-2162.2005.
• 8 Sobel JD. Vulvovaginal candidosis. Lancet 2007; 369 (9577): 1961-1971 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(07)60917-9.
• 9 Sanches JM, Giraldo PC, Amaral R, Eberlin MN, Marques LA, Migliorini I. et al. Vaginal lipidomics of women with vulvovaginal candidiasis and cytolytic vaginosis: A non-targeted LC-MS pilot study. PLoS One 2018; 13 (08) e0202401 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202401.
• 10 Yang S, Zhang Y, Liu Y, Wang J, Chen S, Li S. Clinical significance and characteristic clinical differences of cytolytic vaginosis in recurrent vulvovaginitis. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2017; 82 (02) 137-143 DOI: 10.1159/000446945.
• 11 Cibley LJ, Cibley LJ. Cytolytic vaginosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991; 165 (4 Pt 2): 1245-1249 DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(12)90736-x.
• 12 Xu H, Zhang X, Yao W, Sun Y, Zhang Y. Characterization of the vaginal microbiome during cytolytic vaginosis using high-throughput sequencing. J Clin Lab Anal 2019; 33 (01) e22653 DOI: 10.1002/jcla.22653.
• 13 Hu Z, Zhou W, Mu L, Kuang L, Su M, Jiang Y. Identification of cytolytic vaginosis versus vulvovaginal candidiasis. J Low Genit Tract Dis 2015; 19 (02) 152-155 DOI: 10.1097/lgt.0000000000000076.
• 14 Cerikcioglu N, Beksac MS. Cytolytic vaginosis: misdiagnosed as candidal vaginitis. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol 2004; 12 (01) 13-16 DOI: 10.1080/10647440410001672139.
• 15 Mylonas I, Bergauer F. Diagnosis of vaginal discharge by wet mount microscopy: a simple and underrated method. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2011; 66 (06) 359-368 DOI: 10.1097/OGX.0b013e31822bdf31.
• 16 Wathne B, Holst E, Hovelius B, Mårdh PA. Vaginal discharge–comparison of clinical, laboratory and microbiological findings. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1994; 73 (10) 802-808 DOI: 10.3109/00016349409072509.
• 17 Horowitz BJ, Mårdh PA, Nagy E, Rank EL. Vaginal lactobacillosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 170 (03) 857-861 DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(94)70298-5.
• 18 Paavonen J. Vulvodynia–a complex syndrome of vulvar pain. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1995; 74 (04) 243-247 DOI: 10.3109/00016349509024442.
• 19 Foschi C, Salvo M, Cevenini R, Parolin C, Vitali B, Marangoni A. Vaginal lactobacilli reduce neisseria gonorrhoeae viability through multiple strategies: an in vitro study. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2017; 7: 502 DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2017.00502.
• 20 Mirmonsef P, Hotton AL, Gilbert D, Burgad D, Landay A, Weber KM. et al. Free glycogen in vaginal fluids is associated with Lactobacillus colonization and low vaginal pH. PLoS One 2014; 9 (07) e102467 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102467.
• 21 Beghini J, Linhares IM, Giraldo PC, Ledger WJ, Witkin SS. Differential expression of lactic acid isomers, extracellular matrix metalloproteinase inducer, and matrix metalloproteinase-8 in vaginal fluid from women with vaginal disorders. BJOG 2015; 122 (12) 1580-1585 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.13072.