Male-Partner Treatment to Prevent Recurrence of Bacterial Vaginosis

Background
Bacterial vaginosis affects one third of reproductive-aged women, and recurrence is common. Evidence of sexual exchange of bacterial vaginosis–associated organisms between partners suggests that male-partner treatment may increase the likelihood of cure.

Methods
This open-label, randomized, controlled trial involved couples in which a woman had bacterial vaginosis and was in a monogamous relationship with a male partner. In the partner-treatment group, the woman received first-line recommended antimicrobial agents and the male partner received oral and topical antimicrobial treatment (metronidazole 400-mg tablets and 2% clindamycin cream applied to penile skin, both twice daily for 7 days). In the control group, the woman received first-line treatment and the male partner received no treatment (standard care). The primary outcome was recurrence of bacterial vaginosis within 12 weeks.

Results
A total of 81 couples were assigned to the partner-treatment group, and 83 couples were assigned to the control group. The trial was stopped by the data and safety monitoring board after 150 couples had completed the 12-week follow-up period because treatment of the woman only was inferior to treatment of both the woman and her male partner. In the modified intention-to-treat population, recurrence occurred in 24 of 69 women (35%) in the partner-treatment group (recurrence rate, 1.6 per person-year; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 2.4) and in 43 of 68 women (63%) in the control group (recurrence rate, 4.2 per person-year; 95% CI, 3.2 to 5.7), which corresponded to an absolute risk difference of −2.6 recurrences per person-year (95% CI, −4.0 to −1.2; P<0.001). Adverse events in treated men included nausea, headache, and metallic taste.

Conclusions
The addition of combined oral and topical antimicrobial therapy for male partners to treatment of women for bacterial vaginosis resulted in a lower rate of recurrence of bacterial vaginosis within 12 weeks than standard care. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; StepUp Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12619000196145.)

Author/s:

Lenka A Vodstrcil, Erica L Plummer, Christopher K Fairley, Jane S Hocking, Matthew G Law, Kathy Petoumenos, Deborah Bateson, Gerald L Murray, Basil Donovan, Eric P F Chow, Marcus Y Chen, John Kaldor, Catriona S Bradshaw, StepUp Team

Antibiotics After Incision and Drainage for Uncomplicated Skin Abscesses: A Clinical Practice Guide

Jeffrey Wilson — Thu, 23 Aug 2018 16:46:00 +0000

Date Added:

September 29, 2018

Journal/Publication:

The BMJ

Publisher:

BMJ

Publication Date:

February 6, 2018

Issue:

360

URL:

Antibiotics After Incision and Drainage for Uncomplicated Skin Abscesses: A Clinical Practice Guide

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1136/bmj.k243

Keywords

PMID (1):

29437651

MeSH

trimethoprim, sulfamethoxazole drug combination

drug resistance, bacterial

anti-bacterial agents

abscess

drainage

clindamycin

Treatment with TMP-SMX or clindamycin after incision and drainage modestly reduces pain and treatment failure and probably reduces abscess recurrence, but treatment increase the risk of adverse effects including nausea and diarrhea. Other antibiotics do not improve outcomes after I&D

Free full text

View

What you need to know

For uncomplicated skin abscesses, we suggest using trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) or clindamycin in addition to incision and drainage rather than incision and drainage alone, and emphasise the need for shared decision making
TMP-SMX or clindamycin modestly reduces pain and treatment failure and probably reduces abscess recurrence, but increases the risk of adverse effects including nausea and diarrhoea
We suggest TMP-SMX rather than clindamycin because TMP-SMX has a lower risk of diarrhoea
Cephalosporins in addition to incision and drainage are probably not more effective than incision and drainage alone in most settings
From a societal perspective, the modest benefits from adjuvant antibiotics may not outweigh the harms from increased antimicrobial resistance in the community, although this is speculative

Author/s:

Vermandere, Mieke, Aertgeerts, Bert, Agoritsas, Thomas, Liu, Catherine, Burgers, Jako, Merglen, Arnaud, Okwen, Patrick Mbah, Lytvyn, Lyubov, Chua, Shunjie, Vandvik, Per O., Guyatt, Gordon H., Beltran-Arroyave, Claudia, Lavergne, Valéry, Speeckaert, Reinhart, Steen, Finn E., Arteaga, Victoria, Sender, Rachelle, McLeod, Shelley, Sun, Xin, Wang, Wen, Siemieniuk, Reed A.C.