Reed Barbara D, Sen Ananda, Harlow Sioban D, Haefner Hope K, Gracely Richard H
1Department of Family Medicine, 2Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, 3Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, 4Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; and 5School of Dentistry, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2017 Jan;21(1):78-84. doi: 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000267.
To assess differences in vulvar and peripheral sensitivity between women with and without vulvodynia.
Women with vulvodynia (n = 41) and age-matched controls (n = 43) seen in the outpatient setting were evaluated via surveys, clinical examination, and multimodal sensory testing (pressure, heat, cold, vibration, and electrical stimulation). The relationships between sensitivity to various sensory modalities and case/control status, as well as by vulvodynia subgroups, were assessed using logistic regression.
Women with vulvodynia were more sensitive to pressure and to electrical stimuli than were control women at the vulva (median, 22 vs 230 g and 0.495 vs 0.769 mA, respectively; P < 0.001 for each) and at the thumb (median, 2500 vs 4250 g and 0.578 vs 0.764 mA, respectively; P = 0.006 for pressure, P < 0.001 for electrical stimulation). Heat, cold, and vibration detection thresholds did not differ significantly between these groups (P > 0.025). Those reporting spontaneous pain versus provoked pain had greater pressure sensitivity to the thumb (median, 1850 vs 2690 g; P = 0.020) and greater electrical sensitivity at the introitus (0.450 vs 0.608 mA; P = 0.011), and those with primary versus secondary vulvodynia had substantially greater pressure sensitivity to the thumb (median, 2438 vs 3125 g, P = 0.004). However, having localized versus generalized vulvodynia was not associated with differences in pressure or electrical sensitivity.
Sensitivities to pressure and electrical stimuli are greater among vulvodynia cases than among controls and support 2 previously defined subgroups-those reporting spontaneous pain versus those whose pain only occurred when provoked, and those with primary versus secondary vulvodynia.
评估患有和未患有外阴痛的女性在外阴及外周敏感性方面的差异。
对门诊就诊的患有外阴痛的女性(n = 41)和年龄匹配的对照组女性(n = 43)进行调查、临床检查以及多模式感觉测试(压力、热、冷、振动和电刺激)。使用逻辑回归评估对各种感觉模式的敏感性与病例/对照状态之间的关系,以及按外阴痛亚组的关系。
患有外阴痛的女性在外阴处对压力和电刺激比对照组女性更敏感(中位数分别为22 vs 230 g和0.495 vs 0.769 mA;每项P < 0.001),在拇指处也是如此(中位数分别为2500 vs 4250 g和0.578 vs 0.764 mA;压力P = 0.006,电刺激P < 0.001)。这些组之间的热、冷和振动检测阈值无显著差异(P > 0.025)。报告自发痛与激发痛的患者对拇指的压力敏感性更高(中位数,1850 vs 2690 g;P = 0.020),在阴道口处的电敏感性更高(0.450 vs 0.608 mA;P = 0.011),原发性与继发性外阴痛患者对拇指的压力敏感性显著更高(中位数,2438 vs 3125 g,P = 0.004)。然而,局限性与广泛性外阴痛与压力或电敏感性差异无关。
外阴痛患者对压力和电刺激的敏感性高于对照组,支持之前定义的两个亚组——报告自发痛的患者与仅在激发时出现疼痛的患者,以及原发性与继发性外阴痛患者。