|
Gordon White, F.A.C. Ven., M.H.P, M.F.P.H.M., Marek Jantos, M.A., and Howard Glazer, Ph.D.
OBJECTIVE: To study the pelvic floor electromyographic (EMG)
responses of a cohort of patients diagnosed with vulvar vestibulitis.
STUDY DESIGN: Following full medical and laboratory workup,
patients with vestibulitis were given pelvicb floor EMG. Results
were compared with the collated data, termed the "nonmorbid
EMG pelvic floor response, derived from a study control group of
50 symptomless subjects. Six aspects of the EMG response were examined:
resting baseline, contractile potential, resting standard deviation,
recruitment, recruitment recovery and power spectral analysis.
RESULTS: As compared to the study control group, the cohort
demonstrated elevated resting baseline above 2.0 uV in 23 (71 %);
poor contractile potential, < 17 uV, in 20 (65%); elevated resting
standard deviation, > 0.20, in 30 (93%); slow to poor recruitment
recovery after contraction, >0.2 seconds in 27 (86%) and low
frequency, < 115 Hz in 22 (69%).
CONCLUSION: The study confirmed that of vestibulitis patients,
88% will show at least three of the above altered criteria and that
the diagnosis can be confirmed by: (1) the instability of muscle,
(2) poor muscle recovery after contraction, and (3) elevated resting
baseline plus one other optional criterion, either (4) reduced frequency
or (5) reduced muscle contraction strength.
(J Reprod Med 1997;42:157-160)
Keywords: vulvar diseases, vulvar vestibulitis.
Introduction
An increasing number of women present with severe vulvar pain on
sexual penetration and tampon insertion and removal. Women diagnosed
with vestibulitis and participating in various sporting activities
experience pain wearing tight clothing. In fact, pressure of any
nature against the vestibule produces pain and discomfort. Frequently
patients have other associated symptoms-sensations of swelling,
dryness, vulvar burning (vulvodynia)1, pruritus and urinary frequency.
Examination using a cotton-tipped applicator elicits pain around
the vestibule close to but just distal from the hymen. Patients
can perceive tenderness around the vestibule, sometimes on both
sides and often at the 4 and 8 o'clock positions. Digital examination
will often elicit pain in the vicinity of the pubococcygeus muscle
and base of the bladder.
The diagnosis [of vestibulitis]
can be confirmed by
electromyographic readings in
the presence of at least three
essential characteristics ....
No etiology for the vestibulitis syndrome2 has been recognized,
although an inflammatory infiltrate has been confirmed composed
of a mixed population of T lymphocytes, monocytes and occasional
plasma cells.3 The minor vestibular glands are never directly involved
by inflammation.
Patients with symptoms suggestive of vulvar vestibulitus but
who do not satisfy the EMG characteristics should be reviewed
carefully to exclude ... other causes....
Recent hypotheses suggest that these conditions are neurophysiologic
responses rather than somatic pain and that they are sympathetically
mediated.4,5
Since the principal motor and sensory nerve fibers of both the
vulva and pubococcygens muscle are branches of the pudendal nerve
plexus, containing fibers from S3 and S4, it is hypothesized that
superficial vulvar and vestibular irritability destabilize the musculature
of the pelvic floor. This is reflected in the electromyographic
(EMG) recordings of the muscles that are within the pain reference
zone of such disturbed tissue.6,7
Methods
A cohort of 32 white women presenting to our unit with symptoms
of typical vestibulitis both with and without vulvodynia were assessed
against specific criteria and an accurate clinical diagnosis made.
The results are set out below in Table 1.
Subsequently an EMG assessment of the pelvic floor was carried
out using a single-user vaginal sensor (T6050, Thought Technology
Ltd., Montreal, Quebec, Canada).
Table 1 Clinical Criteria of the Cohort
| Criterion |
n |
%Cohort |
| Point
tenderness |
32 |
100 |
| Vestibular
erythema |
32 |
100 |
| Vulvar
burning |
30 |
93 |
| Pain
on penetration |
30 |
93 |
| Urinary
frequency± incontinence |
30 |
93 |
| Vulvar
dryness, pruritus ± swelling |
26 |
82 |
| |
|
|
N = 32.
and a computerized EMG analysis using the Glazer Pelvic Muscle
Rehabilitation Program, Version 2.2 (Biobehavioral Medical Rehabilitation
Inc., Jacksonville, Florida). The sensor is designed to accurately
monitor and "feedback" EMG activity of the pelvic floor
musculature. The surface electrodes of the vaginal sensor detect
gross EMG signals that correlate 0.99% with data produced by invasive
fine wire stainless steel electrodes.8
To date there are no age group or other published normative data
for EMG recordings of pelvic floor musculature in women. Such information
is currently being collected. Current baseline data were derived
from results in a group of 50 subjects derived from the following
sources: (1) patient outcome responses after treatment with EMG,
and (2) limited number of assessments of women without signs or
symptoms of vestibulitis/vulvodynia. We have termed this assumed
standard "nonmorbid EMG pelvic floor response."
The nonmorbid EMG response of the 50 subjects was derived as follows:
Resting potential. This is the mean integrated EMG root
mean square (rms) measured over six 12-second rest periods alternated
with six 12-second contractions. In 82% of subjects this was found
to be <2.0 uV.
Contractile potential. This is the mean of six 12-second,
contraction-integrated EMG rms with 12-second rest periods between
each contraction. This was found to be > 17.5 uV in 87% of subjects.
Resting standard deviation. This is the mean of the standard
deviations of the integrated EMG rms for six 12-second rest periods.
It was found to be <0.2 in 79% of subjects.
Recruitment. This is the time in seconds for an integrated
EMG rms amplitude to go from the resting baseline to 80% of contraction
average with voluntary contraction. In 99% of subjects this was
<0.2 seconds.
Recruitment recovery. This is the time for an integrated
EMG rms amplitude to return from at least the 80% state of voluntary
contraction to the state of baseline relaxation. This was assessed
to be <0.2 seconds in 94% of subjects.
Frequency. This is the mean power density spectral analysis
of integrated EMG rms for six separate 12-second contraction periods
with 12-second rest periods between each contraction and was estimated
to be >115 Hz in 88% of subjects. A typical graph of such a subject
is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Typical nonmorbid EMG pelvic floor responses. Characteristics:
(1) low resting baseline with good muscle stability, (2) good recruitment
with clear demarcation between rest and contraction, (3) strong
contraction with no fatigue (sustained contraction), (4) abrupt
fall from contraction to resting baseline (relaxation), and (5)
low resting baseline with good muscle stability after contraction.
Results
This cohort of women had an average age of 33 years with a duration
of vestibulitis symptoms of 33 months (range 3-240). Fourteen patients
reported a past history of sexually transmitted disease (herpes
genitalis 5, human papillomavirus infection 8, pelvic inflammatory
disease 1, syphilis 1 and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2).
The average number of reported sexual partners was 7, with a range
1-35. The average age at the first sexual experience was 17.8 years,
and 9 patients reported sexual trauma or abuse as children. All
patients reported pain at intercourse, and the assessed rating,
on a scale of 0-10, was 7.3. Twenty-seven patients experienced some
genital pain with orgasm; the average severity of pain on the 0-10
scale was 6.8. Most patients (97%) had had a history of genital
candidiasis, while 70% reported having experienced premenstrual
tension.
Table II sets out the EMG responses of the 32 patients clinically
diagnosed with vestibulitis. The resting baseline was found to be
elevated due to hypertonicity of the muscle bundles in 23 patients
(71%), and the contractile potential in 20 (65%) was poor due to
muscle fatigue. The resting standard deviation was high (>0.20)
in 30 patients (93%), indicating muscle instability, while recruitment
recovery after contraction was slow (>0.2 seconds) in 20 patients
(86%), and the frequency was low, <115 Hz, in 22 (69%).
Table ll EMG Response in the Study Cohort
| Response |
Variation |
No. |
% |
| Resting
baseline |
>2.0
uV |
23 |
71 |
| Contractile
potential |
<17
uV |
20 |
65 |
| Resting
standard deviation |
>0.2 |
30 |
93 |
| Recruitment |
>0.2
sec |
1 |
3 |
| Recruitment
recovery |
_>0.2
sec |
27 |
86 |
| Frequency |
<115
Hz |
22 |
69 |
| |
|
|
|
N=32.
Eighty-eight percent (88%) of patients with a clinical diagnosis
of vestibulitis satisfied at least three or more of these abnormal
EMG criteria. Figure 2 shows a typical graph from a patient with
vestibulitis.
The applicability and use of this form of analysis can be seen
from the following history of a patient not included in this study
cohort. A 32-year-old woman was referred to our unit having had
a six-month history of genital discomfort with a clinical assessment
suggesting point tenderness, vulvar burning, pain on penetration,
clear vaginal discharge and urinary frequency. Initially the picture
suggested a diagnosis of vulvar vestibulitis. Routine medical assessment
was carried out, including laboratory testing, and EMG was performed.
Figure 2 Pelvic EMG activity for typical vulvar vestibulitis.
Characteristics: (1) elevated and unstable resting baseline, (2)poor
recruitment, (3) spasm on sustained contraction and fatigue, (4)
poor recovery, and (5) post contraction baseline remains elevated,
with high amplitude and instability.
The results of the EMG assessment were as follows: resting baseline
0.57 uV, muscle stability with a 0.15 standard deviation, contraction
strength 41.39 uV, recruitment recovery 0.2 second and frequency
125 Hz. These data indicated a nonmorbid EMG response in comparison
with our baseline data. Laboratory assessment of the vaginal and
cervical mucus showed a marked overgrowth of lactobacilli with minimal
inflammation and a few white blood cells. The pH was acidic, 4.0,
and there were no organisms or yeast cells. Ragged epithelial cells
were present, with some free nuclei. The picture was consistent
with that described by Cibley and Cibley9 and termed "cytolytic
vaginosis." The patient was treated for seven days with once-daily
pessaries containing di-iodohydroxyquinoline, 100 mg; boric acid,
65 mg; and phosphoric acid, 17 mg together with twice-daily sodium
bicarbonate genital bathing (30-60 g/L of warm water), resulting
in a rapid and uneventful recovery. The EMG study was not repeated
on account of nonmorbid readings at the outset. Vaginal cytology
returned to normal after two weeks, when all genital symptoms abated.
Discussion
Our study indicated that the following five EMG variations from
the non-norbid EMG pattern were common to our cohort of vestibulitis
patients: muscle instability at rest, poor muscle recovery, elevated
resting baseline, reduced (muscle activity) frequency and reduced
contraction strength (potential). The sixth criterion tested (poor
recruitment of muscle bundles) was found to be of little diagnostic
value.
The study showed that 88% of vestibulitis patients will show three
or more of the above criteria, thus suggesting that the diagnosis
can be confirmed by EMG readings in the presence of at least three
essential characteristics: (1) instability of muscle, (2) poor muscle
recovery after contraction and (3) elevated resting baseline plus
one other optional criterion, either (4) reduced frequency, or (5)
reduced muscle contraction strength.
Patients with symptoms suggestive of vulvar vestibulitus but who
do not satisfy the EMG characteristics should be reviewed carefully
to exclude what could perhaps be other causes of vulvar and vaginal
irritation and discomfort.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge the permission given for this study
by the Ethics Committee, Department of Health and Community Services,
Australian Capital Territory.
References
1. Freidrich EG: Vulvar vestibulitis syndrome.
J Reprod Med 1987;32:110-114
2. McKay M: Vulvodynia: A multifactorial
clinical problem. Arch Dermatol 1989;125:256
3. Pyka RE, Wilkinson EJ, Friedrich EG, et
al: The histopathology of vulvar vestibulitis syndrome. Int J Gynecol
Pathol 1988;7:249-257
4. Lynch PJ: Vulvodynia: A syndrome of unexplained
vulvar pain, psychologic disability and sexual dysfunction. J Reprod
Med 1986;31:773-780
5. Cox JT: Deconstructing vulval pain. Lancet
1995;345:53
6. Travell J, Simons D: Myofascial Pain and
Dysfunction: The Trigger Point Manual. First volume. Baltimore,
William & Wilkins, 1983 7. Glazer HI, Rodke G, Swencionis C,
et al: Treatment of vulvar vestibulitis syndrome with electromyographic
biofeedback of pelvic floor musculature. J Reprod Med 1995;4:283-290
8. Binnie NR, Kawimbe BM, Pfapachrysostomou
N, et al: The importance of the orientation of the electrode plates
in recording the external anal sphincter EMG by noninvasive anal
plug electrodes. Int j Colorect Disease 1991;6:5-9
9. Cibley Lj, Cibley Lj: Cytolytic vaginosis:
A common cause of vaginitis. In Vaginitis and Vaginosis. Edited
by Bj Horowitz, PA Mardh. New York, Wiley-Liss, 1991, pp 181-185
|