Comparison of the effectiveness of common treatment regimens for bacterial vaginosis

I n t r o d u c t i o n .  Bacterial vaginosis (BV), being one of the most common diseases of the female genital organs, is still of interest to a practitioner. In modern conditions, requiring a short time to make a diagnosis and start treatment, it is often necessary to prescribe treatment empirically. Given the variety of regimens for the treatment of BV, it is advisable to identify the most effective for empirical therapy.

A i m .  To determine the most effective treatment regimen for BV among those common in the Russian Federation.

M a t e r i a l s   a n d   m e t h o d s .  The study involved 120 women aged 18 to 45 years who met the inclusion criteria: applying to the antenatal clinic with complaints of abnormal vaginal discharge, the presence of BV, confirmed by the Amsel criteria at the initial admission. The follow-up was carried out during 4 consecutive visits. At the first visit, a clinical investigation was carried out: sampling for bacterioscopic and bacteriological studies, pH-metry of the posterior vaginal vault secretion, the amine whiff test, sampling for the Femoflor 16 real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). At the second visit, all women were divided into 4 representative groups depending on the treatment regimen (group 1: metronidazole (gel) + Lactogynal (vaginal capsules); group 2: clindamycin (cream) + Lactogynal; group 3: chlorhexidine gluconate (vaginal tablets) + Lactogynal; group 4: Elzhina (vaginal tablets) + Lactogynal). At the third visit, on the 7th day of treatment, the intermediate efficacy of the studied regimens was evaluated, and side effects were identified. The fourth visit was scheduled 10–14 days after the end of treatment, during which the final result of treatment and treatment complications were assessed.

R e s u l t s .  There were no significant differences in the studied groups in terms of the presence of complaints of vaginal abnormal discharge, the results of bacterioscopic examination, a positive amine whiff test, and the pH level (p > 0.05). In using the Femoflor-16 RT-PCR, normal state of vaginal biocenosis was determined in 26.67% of patients of each group (p = 1.0), moderate anaerobic dysbiosis – in 33.33% (p = 1.0), severe anaerobic dysbiosis – from 33.33% (in group 4) to 40% (in groups 1–3) (p > 0.05). The most effective was the treatment regimen with the use of Elzhina, its effectiveness was 80%. Also, according to the results of the Femoflor RT-PCR, the drug Elzhina showed the highest efficacy– 96.67%.

C o n c l u s i o n .  The most effective was the treatment regimen with the use of a combined drug with antibacterial, antiprotozoal, antifungal and anti-inflammatory action for topical administration – Elzhina. This drug is highly effective and can be recommended as an empirical treatment for BV.

1. Peremykina A.V., Andreyev A.O., Bayramova G.R. et al. The role of the microbiome and transcriptome in the development and progression of CIN. Medical Council. 2021;13:223–230. DOI: 10.21518/2079-701X-2021-13-223-230. (In Russ.)

2. Ledina A.V. Vaginal discharge: causes, algorithm of management of patient, modern approaches to treatment and prevention. Obstetrics and Gynecology. News. Opinions. Training. 2019;7(3):107–111. DOI: 10.24411/2303-9698-2019-13016. (In Russ.)

3. Abdul-Aziz M., Mahdy M.A.K., Abdul-Ghani R. et al. Bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis and trichomonal vaginitis among reproductive-aged women seeking primary healthcare in Sana’a city, Yemen. BMC Infect. Dis. 2019;19(1):879. DOI: 10.1186/s12879-019-4549-3.

4. Song S.D., Acharya K.D., Zhu J.E. et al. Daily vaginal microbiota fluctuations associated with natural hormonal cycle, contraceptives, diet, and exercise. mSphere. 2020;5(4):e00593-20. DOI: 10.1128/mSphere.00593-20.

5. Khuraseva A.B., Reminnaya T.V. Bacterial vaginosis – what is it? Regional Bulletin. 2020;2(41):3–4. (In Russ).

6. Shmakova N.A., Chistyakova G.N., Kononova I.N., Remizova I.I. Features of cervico-vaginal microbiocenosis with determination of the species composition of lactobacilli in patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Disease, Treatment and Prevention. 2020;10(3):30–35. (In Russ.)

7. Donders G., Bellen G., Donders F. et al. Improvement of abnormal vaginal flora in Ugandan women by self-testing and short use of intravaginal antimicrobials. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2017;36(4):731–738. DOI: 10.1007/s10096-016-2856-9.

8. Selikhova M.S., Ababekyan N.V. Optimal treatment of bacterial vaginosis before delivery. Doctor. Ru. 2020;19(6):36–39. DOI: 10.31550/1727-2378-2020-19-6-30-35. (In Russ.)

9. Faught B.M., Reyes S. Characterization and treatment of recurrent bacterial vaginosis. J. Women’s Health (Larchmt). 2019;28(9):1218–1226. DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2018.7383.

10. Muzny C.A., Kardas P. A narrative review of current challenges in the diagnosis and management of bacterial vaginosis. Sex Transm. Dis. 2020;47(7):441–446. DOI: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000001178.

11. Piletskaya U.V., Makarov K.Yu., Sokolova T.M., Kozak Yu.V. Comparative analysis of common treatment regimens for bacterial vaginosis on the example of women of reproductive age living in the Central district of Novosibirsk. Modern Science: Actual Problems of Theory and Practice. Series: Natural and Technical Sciences. 2021;1:188–193. DOI: 10.37882/2223-2966.2021.01.24. (In Russ).

12. Dmitruk V.S., Denisov A.A., Lushnikova P.A. Modern opportunities of effective combined treatment of vulvovaginal candidiasis and bacterial vaginosis. Russian Journal of Dermatology and Venereology. 2018;17(4):65–70. DOI: 10.17116/klin-derma20181704165. (In Russ.)

13. Savicheva A.M., Krysanova A.A., Lishchuk O.V. Current data on Gardnerella vaginalis and its role in the development of bacterial vaginosis. Status Praesens. Gynecology. Obstetrics. Infertile Couple. 2019;5(61):32–39. (In Russ.)

14. Dukhanin A.S., Semioshina O.E. Rational choice of vaginal drug formulation. Russian Journal of Woman and Child Health. 2019;2(4):314–320. DOI: 10.32364/2618-8430-2019-2-4-314-320. (In Russ.)

15. Chilova R.A., Proklova G.F., Goncharenko N.V. Differential diagnosis and treatment for bacterial vaginosis. Russian Journal of Woman and Child Health. 2020;3(1):39–43. DOI: 10.32364/2618-8430-2020-3-1-39-43. (In Russ.)