Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Introduction: With the increasing life expectancy, postmenopausal vulvovaginal atrophy has become more prominent in current medical practice, given its impact on quality of life, sexual function, and pelvic floor health. PRP is considered safe and is a low-cost, simple, natural, and minimally invasive method for vaginal rejuvenation. We aim to compare the effects of hormonal treatment options and PRP application for postmenopausal vulvovaginal atrophy. Materials and Methods From a total of 66 patients, topical estrogen treatment was administered to 36 patients, while PRP treatment was performed for 30 patients who had previously received topical estrogen treatment without obtaining a response. To assess the impact of vulvovaginal atrophy and associated symptoms on the quality of life of patients, three different questionnaires, namely vaginal health index, female sexual function index, and vulvovaginal symptoms questionnaire, along with the visual analog scale, were administered at 4 weeks interval. Results In the assessment at the 12th week, the results obtained from the use of female sexual function index and vulvovaginal symptoms questionnaire in patients treated with PRP showed a significant difference compared to the results obtained from patients treated with topical estrogen (p: 0.004, p: 0.000). Conclusion Autologous platelet-rich plasma injection is a safe and effective minimal invasive monotherapy for postmenopausal VVA and, consequently, vulvovaginal rejuvenation. PRP injection has been regarded as a promising method for the treatment of VVA in postmenopausal patients with contraindications to hormone therapy and to improve hydration of the vaginal mucosa.
Atlıhan et al. (Mon,) studied this question.