Personal opinion: Treatment of vulvovaginal atrophy – are hidden interests and misinformation preventing better management?

Amos Pines, David Sturdee
In: Climacteric · 2015 · vol. 18(6) , pp. 802–804 · doi:10.3109/13697137.2015.1090149 · PMID:26397968 · W1852844221
article OA: closed CC0
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher

Abstract

Menopausal women very often complain of vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA)-related symptoms, which mainly include dryness, irritation, dyspareunia and pain. The ideal therapeutic approach is to use systemic or intravaginal estrogen, which has proved to be effective. However, because of safety concerns that were raised after the publication of the Women's Health Initiative data, non-estrogenic and non-hormonal therapies for VVA have been developed and heavily promoted. Many menopause specialists believe that the flow of information on the newer products indicated for VVA seems to include an inaccurate message, which downgrades the use of estrogenic preparations and upgrades modern non-estrogenic therapies. Both media and medical sources have created an atmosphere of exaggerated worries over intravaginal estrogen therapies, which are not substantiated by hard clinical facts.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

dyspareunia

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

References (18)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-08-11T06:58:28.661508+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK