The protective influence of progestogen only contraception against vaginal moniliasis

Toppozada, M.; Onsy, F.A.; Fares, Elham Al; Amir, Sabahat; Shaala, S.

doi:10.1016/0010-7824(79)90082-9

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Conversely, it is known that a hypoestrogenic state such as that induced by the use of depomedroxyprogesterone can lead to a loss of epithelial glycogen and a marked reduction in Candida. 15,23 We did not see a significant increase in the percentage of women with yeast by culture, but we did see a nonsignificant increase in the estimated average concentrations of yeast with pill use (P ϭ .08). Perhaps the oral contraceptive with enterohepatic circulation stimulates vaginal glycogen production more than vaginal absorption of an estrogen?…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

A Comparison Between the Vaginal Ring and Oral Contraceptives

Veres

Miller

Burington

2004

Obstetrics & Gynecology

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

A Comparison Between the Vaginal Ring and Oral Contraceptives

Veres

Miller

Burington

2004

Obstetrics & Gynecology

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…49 In 1979, a study by Toppozada et al suggested that those using DMPA had reduced incidence of candidal vaginal cultures compared with those not using it, and the incidence of vaginal candidiasis reduced even further with long-term users. 50 The use of DMPA with recurrent VVC has not been published in an RCT. Dennerstein's interest in this area resulted in an observational study that followed a group of 15 women with recurrent VVC who used DMPA for contraception for up to seven years.…”

Section: History Of Allergiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive review of conventional and non‐conventional methods of management of recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis

Watson

Calabretto

2007

Aust NZ J Obst Gynaeco

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) is a condition what causes women a great deal of discomfort, inconvenience, and sometimes has psychological sequelae.(1) This condition is notoriously difficult to manage. Conventional management is generally favoured by medical practitioners. Some practitioners prefer not to offer other options because of significant possible side-effects and the lack of research supporting alternative treatments. There are many studies and much available information surrounding uncomplicated VVC, including two systematic reviews.(2,3) In the area of recurrent VVC however, quality conclusive studies are scarce, and recurrent VVC is featured infrequently in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Systematic reviews that strongly support a particular pharmacological method of conventional management of recurrent VVC over another are absent from medical literature. Recommendations are largely formed on the basis of scanty RCTs and expert opinion. There is even less conclusive evidence in the area of alternative therapies; yet despite this, anecdotally many practitioners (both alternative and mainstream) continue to advocate certain treatments in the absence of any reliable cure that can be confidently prescribed. As the use of methods other than mainstream medicine becomes more widespread, it is important to be aware of both conventional and non-conventional management of recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis. Practitioners need to ascertain their patient's preference and treatment history. It is difficult to find comprehensive literature assessing both approaches. Giving women the most up-to-date and relevant information, and different management options, is essential in allowing them to make informed decisions. This review critically assesses both mainstream and less conventional approaches in the management of recurrent VVC.

show abstract

“…It is also less than that of Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (150mg per 3 months) and Norethisterone enanthate (200rag per 3 months) [14]. This low progestogen level among Norplant users will probably not affect the glycogen content of the vaginal epithelium nor will it cause its increase.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…The probability that the observed increase in CA at 6 months is not related to the Norplant progestogen itself is further supported by the fact that progestogenonly injectable contraceptives are associated with a decrease in the incidence of vaginal candidiasis [14].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Effect of subdermal levonorgestrel contraceptive implants on vaginal candidiasis

1986

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A total of 150 women in 3 equal groups, each using a different contraceptive method (group I used Norplant, group II used the IUD and group III used combined OC pills) were investigated for the presence of vaginal candidiasis before and at various time intervals (3, 6 and 12 months) after starting to use the particular contraceptive method. The incidence of vaginal Candida albicans infection increased significantly among pill and IUD users, but with a much lower intensity among the latter cases. In Norplant users the increase was slight and insignificant. The explanation of these findings within the context of changes in local vaginal milieu is discussed.

show abstract

The protective influence of progestogen only contraception against vaginal moniliasis

Cited by 15 publications

References 4 publications

A Comparison Between the Vaginal Ring and Oral Contraceptives

A Comparison Between the Vaginal Ring and Oral Contraceptives

Comprehensive review of conventional and non‐conventional methods of management of recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis

Effect of subdermal levonorgestrel contraceptive implants on vaginal candidiasis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About