| |
Applications in Urology and Gynecology
Introduction
Vulvodynia is a descriptive, not a diagnostic, term covering a
wide range of disorders which have, as one component, pain in the
vulvar area. Vulvar pain can arise from many sources. In no other
area of biofeedback practice, is it more important to rule out all
medical reasons for the symptoms prior to commencing treatment,
and to treat patients only under prescription from a specialty physician,
not on self-referral. While there are many acute problems that may
initiate or prolong introital dyspareunia (pain on vaginal penetration)
or vulvar burning sensations, you will probably be referred only
the chronic cases. If there are still acute problems present, these
must be remedied prior to further treatment. Gynecological sources
of vulvovaginal discomfort include vaginal infections, fungal (a
wide range of yeast overgrowth includes hundreds of identified species)
or bacterial (Bacterial Vaginiosis). These infections cause changes
in the vaginal ecosystem such that vaginal discharge is highly irritative
to the vulvar tissue.
Another major source of vulvar discomfort is hormone related and
occurs perimenopausally and post menopausally. Estrogen deficiency
frequently leads to a thinning of vulvar tissue with consequent
irritation. Dermatological sources of vulvar discomfort include
a variety of conditions involving vulvar tissue changes such as
lichen simplex chronicus, lichen planus and lichen sclerosis. In
these conditions, a thickening of the vulvar skin, lichenification,
causes localized irritative symptoms. Venerological sources of vulvovaginal
pain encompass all sexually transmitted diseases such as herpes
simplex virus (HSV). Vulvar warts, such as those found in human
pappilomavirus (HPV) are known to cause irritation in the vulva.
Precancerous and cancerous vulvar diseases, including vulvar intraepithelial
neoplasias (VIN, precancerous) and warty and baseloid vulvar carcinomas,
are all known to cause vulvar discomfort.
Many women experience transient vulvar irritation from any of the
above sources or from contact with irritants, including soaps, detergents,
topical vulvar preparations used to treat some of the above conditions,
prolonged or inadequately lubricated penile vaginal intercourse
and vulvar trauma associated with accidents or surgery. In most
cases, the irritation is transient and does not need to be addressed
once the underlying causes have been identified and treated. This
extremely limited overview of the sources of vulvar irritative symptoms
is given to emphasize the necessity for a complete diagnostic work
up and appropriate medical treatment before any biofeedback intervention
is considered.
Once all known sources of vulvar tissue disturbance have been identified,
diagnosed and satisfactorily treated, there remains a population
of women in which vulvar irritative symptoms persist. The
remaining two symptoms are just that, not diagnoses but symptoms
and are, by definition, diagnosed by exclusion. They do not have
a known etiology, are not associated with any know tissue pathology
and therefore are "functional" in nature, as opposed to
"structural". These two, often overlapping, symptom
patterns include: 1) Vulvar Vestibulitis Syndrome and 2) Essential
or Dysesthetic Vulvodynia.
Vulvar vestibulitis syndrome (VVS) is characterized by introital
dyspareunia and may involve swelling, erythema and exquisite tenderness
to touch localized to the vestibule of the vagina (anatomically
defined as extending from the frenulum of the clitoris, anterioly,
to the forchette, posteriorly. The innermost border is the hymenal
ring and the lateral border is Hart's line on the inner aspect of
the labia minora. Into this space, open the major vestibular glands
-Bartholin's, Skene's and periurethral - and the minor vestibular
glands). The term vulvar vestibulitis syndrome was introduced in
1987 by Eduard Friedrich (1) to group together a constellation
of signs and symptoms that involved, and were limited to, the vulvar
vestibule. These consist of 1) severe pain on vestibular touch or
attempted vaginal entry, 2) tenderness to pressure localized within
the vulvar vestibule, and 3) physical findings confined to vulvar
erythema of various degrees. Patients with this condition typically
suffer no discomfort unless there is direct pressure on the vestibule.
It is quite usual for these patients to avoid wearing tight jeans
and situations involving prolonged sitting, which would exacerbate
the pressure of tight clothing. These patients are often intercourse
abstinent and, eventually, totally sexually abstinent for prolonged
periods of time. Since the demographics of these patients are typically
Caucasian, educated, upper-middle class women ranging in their 20's
and 30's, the sexual consequences of this condition are often psychologically
and interpersonally devastating. Because this condition has no known
etiology and is symptomatically manifest and functionally limiting
primarily in the area of sexual activity, it is not surprising that
some have suggested that this is a psychogenic disorder. Research
in this area has demonstrated clearly that this population shows
no significant medical, psychological or sexual history differences
from normal matched controls thus ruling out this hypothesis(2).
Conservative medical treatment for this condition includes low dose
tricyclics, to block the nerve mediated pain, antihistamines, to
reduce the localized swelling, alpha interferon injections, topical
palliatives such as oilated oatmeal (aveeno solution) and topical
anesthetics (lidocaine), to permit intercourse. If these interventions
produce unsatisfactory results, the Gold Standard treatment has
been the surgical excision of the affected area, a skinning vestibulectomy
with vaginal advancement and perineoplasty. The literature indicates
that this procedure produces satisfactory results in approximately
80% of those treated(3).
Essential or dysesthetic vulvodynia is a condition of diffuse vulvar
burning, which can vary from mild to extreme, and from intermittent
to chronic. It tends to be progressive with respect to chronicity
and intensity of symptoms. It is of unknown etiology and may have
no visible vulvar changes. In its more intense and chronic form,
it can be totally disabling. The term vulvodynia was first introduced
at the 1975 Congress of the International Society for the Study
of Vulvovaginal Diseases (ISSVD). In 1983 the ISSVD task force charged
to study vulvar pain defined vulvodynia as "chronic vulvar
discomfort, especially that characterized by the patient's complaint
of burning (and sometimes stinging, irritation or rawness)".
Like vestibulitis, it tends to reduce sexual activity, leading frequently
to sexual abstinence and the associated psychological and interpersonal
consequences. Medical treatments for this condition include tricyclics,
antihistamines, neurontin, flexaril and topical palliatives and
anesthetics. Surgery has not been shown to have any beneficial role
in the treatment of this condition. While the subjective complaint
in both VVS and vulvodynia may be dyspareunia, the sine-qua-non
of pure VVS is introital dyspareunia. Patients with vulvodynia will
also have constant or intermittent burning.
Vulvar vestibulitis syndrome and dysesthetic vulvodynia frequently
overlap and are also frequently associated with interstitial cystitis
(IC), a urological condition of urinary urgency, frequency and bladder
spasms, irritable bowel syndrome (lBS), and fibromyalgia, a condition
encompassing pervasive muscle pain and sleep disorder. This has
led some to suggest a possible autoimmune source for these conditions.
It has also been suggested that vestibulitis and vulvodynia are,
possibly, different stages of the same disorder, with localized
symptoms of vestibulitis becoming more persistent and diffuse as
the irritation is prolonged. There are many problems with this hypothesis,
such as patients who have prolonged vestibulitis without ever developing
vulvar dysesthesia, and those, whose condition starts with dysesthesia
but never develop localized introital dyspareunia. Another suggestion
is that both of these conditions represent a form of vulvar reflex
sympathetic dystrophy with sensitization of nociceptive 'c' fibers,
so that touch sensation is replaced with an experience of pain.
Unfortunately, due to limited funding and the relatively small
percentage of the population affected by these conditions, little
basic science or clinical research has been, or is presently, being
conducted concerning these conditions.
Biofeedback Methodology
The specialty physicians of the Columbia University College of
Physicians and Surgeons "Cutaneous Vulvar Clinic" first
approached Dr Glazer in 1991. They had noticed that during intravaginal
digital palpation of the pelvic floor muscles of these women, there
was considerable chronic tension and spasticity. These specialists
requested the use of biofeedback to correct this muscle abnormality.
Dr Glazer's initial reaction was to inform them that he did not
believe that biofeedback would be useful in treating these conditions.
He felt that the muscle hypertonicity most likely represented a
"guarding" or "splinting" of the local striate
muscle in response to the vulvar pain, and did not play a causative
role in the pain. Due to the persistence of the referring physicians,
Dr. Glazer began to work with this patient population using the
standardized protocols and treatment regimes developed for the urological
disorders of incontinence4. It was immediately noticeable that the
surface electromyographic (sEMG) patterns of this population's pelvic
muscles showed abnormal tension and instability at rest, as well
as weakness and instability during phasic, tonic and endurance voluntary
contractions.
After a period of "trial and error" in working with these
patients, Dr. Glazer began to turn his focus away from the most
prominent features of this sEMG pattern, the weakness displayed
in the contractile amplitude. This came about because several patients
had significantly increased their contractile amplitude but still
showed no symptomaticconditions. He felt that the muscle hypertonicity
most likely represented a "guarding" or "splinting"
of the local striate muscle in response to the vulvar pain, and
did not play a causative role in the pain. Due to the persistence
of the referring physicians, Dr. Glazer began to work with this
patient population using the standardized protocols and treatment
regimes developed for the urological disorders of incontinence4.
It was immediately noticeable that the surface electromyographic
(sEMG) patterns of this population's pelvic muscles showed abnormal
tension and instability at rest, as well as weakness and instability
during phasic, tonic and endurance voluntary contractions.
After a period of "trial and error" in working with these
patients, Dr. Glazer began to turn his focus away from the most
prominent features of this sEMG pattern, the weakness displayed
in the contractile amplitude. This came about because several patients
had significantly increased their contractile amplitude but still
showed no symptomatic benefit and, in fact, were sometimes worse.
It appeared that the resting amplit ude (excess tension) was most
associated with vulvar pain. Focusing training on reducing resting
amplitude proved to be more successful but still left a sizable
portion of the population with little to no benefit. It began to
emerge that the variability of the resting amplitude, and not just
the amplitude, was a critical determinant of pain reduction. The
stability of the signal became more significant than its amplitude
and the resting signal more significant than the contractile signal.
It appeared, empirically, that the variability of the resting signal
and, secondarily, the variability of the contractile signal, were
more closely associated with pain variations than signal amplitude
characteristics. Of course, signal variability measures were clearly
noted to vary directly in proportion to amplitude, i.e. higher signal
amplitudes are more variable, both at rest and during contractions.
Research
The first publication using sEMG assisted rehabilitation of pelvic
floor musculature in the treatment of vulvovaginal pain is entitled
"Treatment of Vulvar Vestibulitis Syndrome with Electromyographic
Biofeedback of Pelvic Floor Musculature" (Glazer et al 1995)(5).
This study demonstrated a slightly more than 50% cure rate with
an average self reported improvement of 83% with 80% of sexually
abstinent patients resuming regular intercourse. Two main findings
emerged statistically. The first being that there were neither demographic
nor sEMG characteristics on initial evaluation which predicted response
to this treatment modality. Second it demonstrated that only changes
in the standard deviation of the resting sEMG signal predicted pain
change. This finding confirmed Dr. Glazer's anecdotal experience
that the treatment is essentially a MUSCLE STABILIZING program.
This paper also concluded that "The response to this therapy
suggests that whatever the initial insult or etiologic factor, vulvar
vestibulitis syndrome may be a result of autonomically mediated
pain. This mechanism, as a final common pathway for multiple etiologies,
may explain the lack of consensus on a single antecedent, despite
consistency in symptomatology of the syndrome." So, the critical
factor to emerge, which differentiates this treatment from previous
applications of pelvic floor biofeedback, is a shift of emphasis
away from tonic contractile amplitude and towards reducing muscle
variability overall, predominantly at rest.
Although on the average, vulvovaginal pain patients have less contractile
capacity, It was foun4 that there is a subset of patients who were
at treatment onset, not only very tense and unstable at rest but,
despite this, were also quite strong (above 25uv on initial contractile
evaluation). This population posed a challenge as the tradition
in pelvic floor rehabilitation was to teach the patient to exclusively
localize their contractions in the pubococcygeus muscle, to the
exclusion of surrounding accessory muscle. Using this training procedure,
it was simply not possible to produce a contraction of adequate
amplitude to reliably release the resting tension. Dr. Glazer found
that permitting these patients to use the naturally occurring contractions
of internal obturator, lower abdominals and adductor longus muscles,
supported and enhanced the amplitude of the pelvic floor contraction
adequately to "break" the resting tension level. Thus
the "Glazer" protocols require the individualized "testing"
of the patient with different positions and the use of different
combinations of accessory muscles which enhance, rather than interfere
with, the correct use of the pelvic floor muscles. This procedure
is briefly outlined in a paper entitled "Functional Rehabilitation
of Pelvic Floor Muscles: A Challenge to Tradition" (Glazer
& MacConkey, 1996)(6).
In a 1997 paper (White, Jantos and Glazer)(7), a cohort of 32 vulvovaginal
pain patients were compared to a matched control group of normals
and found several sEMG characteristics which reliably differentiated
the two groups. Cutoffs for these sEMG characteristics were developed
and are summarized as follows:
| sEMG
Characteristic |
Cutoff |
%
Vulvovaginal Pain Pts
exceeding cutoff |
| Resting
Standard Deviation |
>0.20
µv |
93% |
| Recruitment
Recovery Time |
>0.20
sec |
86% |
| Baseline
Amplitude |
>2.00
µv |
71% |
| Tonic
Contraction Median Spectral Frequency |
>115Hz |
69% |
| Tonic
Contractile Potential |
<17
µv |
65% |
This paper reports on a case history of a patient with classic
vulvodynia who produced an sEMG protocol well within normal limits.
Upon return to the gynecologist for further medical evaluation,
the patient was diagnosed with cytolytic vaginosis, treated and
was free of discomfort within a few days. The authors conclude,
in this paper, that sEMG may be the first objective methodology
for forming a differential diagnosis between functional vulvovaginal
pain syndromes and other non-diagnosed medical sources of vulvovaginal
pain such as infections.
Several publications are now in preparation including validating
pelvic floor muscle assessment by digital palpation using sEMG as
the standard(8). This study shows that sEMG is more reliable and
more predictive of pelvic floor dysfunction than is digital evaluation
of pelvic floor function. Another study in preparation compares
sEMG biofeedback, or cognitive behavioral pain management, to vestibulectomy
in the treatment of pure VVS(9). Early results suggest that biofeedback
efficacy is close to that of surgery and improves over time. Research
is now underway on the pattern of sEMG changes observed over treatment
with focus on power density spectral frequency analysis, rise and
recovery times and coefficients of variability for rest and contraction
periods.
Protocol
The "Glazer" protocol for pelvic floor muscle evaluation
uses a five-segment evaluation sequence as follows:
· One minute rest, pre baseline.
· Five rapid contractions (Flicks) with 10 seconds rest
between each (phasic).
· Five 10 second contractions with 10 second rests between
each (tonic).
· A single endurance contraction of 60 seconds (endurance).
· One minute rest, post baseline.
This protocol is a similar sequence to that used in assessing pelvic
floor muscles for incontinence. The difference is not in the sequence
of muscle actions but the measurements taken. As mentioned earlier,
the major goal, in treating incontinence, is increasing contractile
amplitude to enhance external urethral sphincter closure pressures.
For pelvic pain, we have found that amplitude changes are only a
si~nall part of the picture. In the "Glazer" protocol,
for each contraction and relaxation period, integrated sEMG amplitude
and standard deviation is measured. In addition, coefficients of
variability (standard deviation divided by amplitude) are taken
as measures of muscle stability, rise and recovery times are taken
at initiation and termination of each contraction and spectral frequencies
(either FFT's or zero crossings) are taken for each contraction.
Another difference between the "Glazer" protocol and previous
incontinence protocols is that accessory muscles (often monitored
with a second sEMG channel on lower abdominals) are not necessarily
minimized. Each patient is assessed with the use of different combinations
of accessory muscles. This is done in order to determine the best
balance between keeping the patient's focus on the internal "lifting"
sensation and, at the same time, maximizing the use of the muscle
contraction to result in a reduction in amplitude and variability
of the subsequent rest period. We look for an exercise position,
contraction type, contraction duration, and number of repetitions
which maximize the exercise. All patients are started on two 20
minute exercise sessions a day, each one consisting of 60 repetitions
of 10 second contractions alternated with 10 second relaxation phases.
All patients are required to use home training devices and intra-vaginal
sensors in the conduct of their home exercises. Patients return
for office evaluations every two weeks for their second and third
visits and then, monthly, for subsequent visits. The frequency of
office visits is determined by the observation of sEMG changes by
the clinician, and compliance of the patient in the conduct of home
exercises.
Over time, with continued training, we look for increased contractile
amplitudes and spectral frequencies with decreased contractile coefficients
of variability and rise and recovery times. In relaxation measures,
we look for reduced amplitude and reduced coefficients of variability.
Amplitude changes are not enough and we have seen, as mentioned
earlier, many patients showing improved contractile amplitude with
reduced resting amplitude and little therapeutic benefit. We believe
that the spectral frequencies, rise and recovery times and coefficients
of variability are related to the predominant fiber type being recruited
and the coordination of use of that fiber type. The critical combination
of higher amplitude contractions with higher spectral frequency,
faster rise/fall times and reduced coefficients of variability suggest
a predominantly fast twitch (type II) fibers. In the presence of
this phenomenon (increased fast twitch coordination), the consequence
is reduced amplitude and variability during rest and a reduction
of the hypertonicity and instability associated with chronic uncoordinated
discharge of fast twitch fibers as seen in the resting sEMG of untreated
vulvovaginal pain patients.
Conclusion
Free form observations of sEMG with or without direct pelvic muscle
palpation does not comprise an adequate evaluation. Replicable protocols,
applied to the patient over time are necessary to assess progress.
Similarly, amplitude and standard deviation measures alone are not
adequate to assess changes, spectral frequencies, rise and recovery
times, coefficients of variability (amplitude corrected standard
deviations) must all be observed to assure that correct rehabilitation
of the pelvic floor muscle is taking place. For those trained in
the traditions of incontinence, it is also important to remember
that you must explore positions, use of accessories, contraction
duration, and number of repetitions to best achieve the desired
sEMG changes. While some patients will do better with exclusive
pelvic floor contractions, others cannot achieve desired outcomes
without the use of accessory muscles.
The application of surface electromyography biofeedback for pelvic
floor muscles to patients suffering from vulvovaginal pain syndromes
is still in infancy. We must remain open to exploration with our
patients, and not be bound by previous traditional methods of evaluation
and treatment which can interfere with positive outcomes.
REFERENCES
1 Friedrich, E.G., Jr., Vulvar Vestibulitis
Syndrome. J. Reprod. Med. 32:110-114,1987.
2 Meana, M., Binik, Y., Khalife, S., and
Cohen, D., Biopsychological Profiles of Women with Dyspareunia.
Obstetrics and Gynecology 90:4:583-590.
3 Marinoff, S.C., and Turner, M.L.C., Vulvar
Vestibulitis Syndrome. Dermatologic Clinics 10:435-444,1992.
4 Perry, J.D. Software Standards for Perineometry,
Biotechnologies, Portland, Maine, 1984.
5 Glazer, H.I., Rodke, G., Swencionis, C.,
Hertz, R. and Young, A.W., Treatment of Vulvar Vestibulitis Syndrome
with Electromyographic Biofeedback of Pelvic Floor Musculature.
J. Reprod Med. 40:283-290, 1995.
6 Glazer, H.I., and MacConkey, D., Functional
Rehabilitation of Pelvic Floor Muscles: A Challenge to Tradition.
Urol. Nurs. 16:68-69, 1996.
7 White, G. Jantos, IvI., and Glazer, 11.1.,
Establishing the Diagnosis of Vulvar Vestibulitis. J. Reprod. Med.
42:157-160.
8 Romani, L., Polaneczky, M. and Glazer,
H.I. A Simple Technique for Assessment of Pelvic Muscle Function
as a Part of Routine Pelvic Examination; Validation by Surface Electromyography.
Manuscript in preparation.
9 Bergeron, S., Binik, Y.M., Khalife, S.
Pagidas, K. and Glazer, H.I. A Randomized Treatment Outcome Study
of Vulvar Vestibulitis Syndrome. Manuscript in preparation.
Copyright 1997 by Howard I. Glazer
|