ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Acute vulvar ulcer (Lipschütz's ulcer) is a rare lesion with local hyperimmunoreactivity triggered by infection, which is characterized by acute, painful, and necrotic ulcerations. This condition is usually found in non-sexually active adolescents, and it resolves spontaneously. We report a case of a 35-year-old woman who was diagnosed with COVID-19 who did not have severe symptoms, but had high levels of D-dimer for 9 days. The COVID-19 diagnosis was followed by the appearance of an acute, necrotic, extremely painful vulvar ulcer, although symptoms caused by COVID-19 had improved. We emphasize the importance of the differential diagnosis to exclude diseases such as Behçet's syndrome, Sexually Transmitted Infections, as well as the presence of viruses that generally trigger Lipschütz's ulcer, such as Epstein-Barr virus and cytomegalovirus. No treatment is usually necessary, however, in the present report due to the pain experienced by the patient, we successfully used oral prednisone.
Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Adolescent , Adult , Behcet Syndrome/complications , Behcet Syndrome/diagnosis , Behcet Syndrome/drug therapy , Epstein-Barr Virus Infections , COVID-19 , Ulcer/drug therapy , Herpesvirus 4, Human , COVID-19 Testing , SARS-CoV-2 , GenitaliaABSTRACT
Abstract Objective To assess themedical doctors andmedical students' opinion regarding the evidence and ethical background of the performance of vulvovaginal aesthetic procedures (VVAPs). Methods Cross-sectional online survey among 664 Portuguese medical doctors and students. Results Most participants considered that there is never or there rarely is amedical reason to perform: vulvar whitening (85.9% [502/584]); hymenoplasty (72.0% [437/607]); mons pubis liposuction (71.6% [426/595]); "G-spot" augmentation (71.0% [409/576]); labia majora augmentation (66.3% [390/588]); labia minora augmentation (58.3% [326/559]); or laser vaginal tightening (52.3%[313/599]).Gynecologists and specialistsweremore likely to consider that there are no medical reasons to performVVAPs; the opposite was true for plastic surgeons and students/residents. Hymenoplasty raised ethical doubts in 51.1% (283/554) of the participants. Plastic surgeons and students/residents were less likely to raise ethical objections, while the opposite was true for gynecologists and specialists. Most considered that VVAPs could contribute to an improvement in self-esteem(92.3% [613/664]); sexual function (78.5% [521/664]); vaginal atrophy (69.9% [464/664]); quality of life (66.3% [440/664]); and sexual pain (61.4% [408/664]). Conclusions While medical doctors and students acknowledge the lack of evidence and scientific support for the performance of VVAPs, most do not raise ethical objections about them, especially if they are students or plastic surgeons, or if they have had or have considered having plastic surgery.
Resumo Objetivos Avaliar a opinião de médicos e estudantes de medicina relativamente à evidência e contexto ético para a realização de procedimentos estéticos vulvovaginais (PEVVs). Métodos Estudo transversal, consistindo de inquérito online a 664 médicos e estudantes de medicina portugueses. Resultados A maioria dos participantes considerou que nunca ou raramente há uma razão médica para a realização de: branqueamento vulvar (85,9% [502/584]); himenoplastia (72,0% [437/607]); lipoaspiração do mons pubis (71,6% [426/595]); aumento do "ponto G" (71,0% [409/576]); aumento dos grandes lábios (66,3% [390/588]); aumento dos pequenos lábios (58,3% [326/559]) ou aperto vaginal com laser (52,3% [313/599]). Ser ginecologista e especialista associou-se a maior probabilidade de considerar não haver razões médicas para a realização de PEVV; o oposto foi verdade para os cirurgiões plásticos e estudantes/internos. A himenoplastia levantou dúvidas em termos éticos em 51,1% (283/554) dos participantes. Cirurgiões plásticos e estudantes/internos relatarammenos dúvidas emtermos éticos; o oposto foi verdade para os ginecologistas ou especialistas. Amaioria considerou que os PEVVs podemcontribuir para uma melhoria na autoestima (92,3% [613/664]); função sexual (78,5% [521/664]); atrofia vaginal (69,9% [464/664]); qualidade de vida (66,3% [440/664]); e dor sexual (61,4% [408/664]). Conclusões Ainda que os médicos e estudantes de medicina reconheçam a falta de evidência e bases científicas para a realização de PEVVs, a maioria não levanta objecções em termos éticos, especialmente se forem estudantes, cirurgiões plásticos, ou se eles próprios tiverem sido submetidos a cirurgia plástica ou considerem vir a sê-lo.