Functional testing is a complementary tool for the diagnosis of vaginitis

Abstract

ObjectiveVaginal microbiota evaluation is a methodology widely used in China to diagnose various vaginal inflammatory diseases. Although vaginal microbiota evaluation has many advantages, it is time-consuming and requires highly skilled and experienced operators. Here, we investigated a six-index functional test that analyzed pH, hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), leukocyte esterase (LEU), sialidase (SNA), β-glucuronidase (GUS), and acetylglucossidase (NAG), and determined its diagnostic value by comparing it with morphological tests of vaginal microbiota.Materials and methodsThe research was conducted using data extracted from the Laboratory Information System of Women and Children’s Hospital. A total of 4902 subjects, ranging in age from 35.4 ± 9.7 years, were analyzed. During the consultation, a minimum of two vaginal swab specimens per patient were collected for both functional and morphological testing. Fisher’s exact was used to analyze data using SPSS.ResultsOf the 4,902 patients, 2,454 were considered to have normal Lactobacillus morphotypes and 3,334 were considered to have normal dominant microbiota. The sensitivity and specificity of H2O2-indicating Lactobacillus morphotypes were 91.3% and 25.28%, respectively, while those of pH-indicating Lactobacillus morphotypes were 88.09% and 59.52%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of H2O2-indicating dominant microbiota were 91.3% and 25.3%, respectively, while those of pH-indicating dominant microbiota were 86.27% and 64.45%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of NAG for vulvovaginal candidiasis were 40.64% and 84.8%, respectively. For aerobic vaginitis, GUS sensitivity was low at 0.52%, while its specificity was high at 99.93%; the LEU sensitivity and specificity values were 94.73% and 27.49%, respectively. Finally, SNA sensitivity and specificity for bacterial vaginosis were 80.72% and 96.78%, respectively.ConclusionFunctional tests (pH, SNA, H2O2, LEU) showed satisfactory sensitivity for the detection of vaginal inflammatory diseases. However, these tests lacked specificity, making it difficult to accurately identify specific pathologies. By contrast, NAG and GUS showed excellent specificity in identifying vaginal inflammatory diseases, but their sensitivity was limited. Therefore, functional tests alone are not sufficient to diagnose various vaginal inflammatory diseases. When functional and morphological tests are inconsistent, morphological tests are currently considered the preferred reference method.