Advertisement

Archiv für Gynäkologie

, Volume 215, Issue 3, pp 245–262 | Cite as

A comparison of the effect of a suppository and two douches on vaginal malodorants

  • L. Keith
  • A. Dravnieks
  • B. K. Krotoszynski
  • Joan Shah
  • D. England
Article

Summary

Gas-chromatographic odor-assay techniques have been used to study vaginal odors. An improved version of this technique was applied to compare the efficacy of a suppository containing phenylmercuric acetate, a feminine douche preparation, and a conventional vinegar douche in reducing the concentrations of malodorants in the vaginal vapors of ten normal women.

Seven malodorants occurred frequently in vaginal vapors; seven more were noted less frequently, and additional ones occurred occasionally. A reduction in the malodorant concentrations was observed with all treatments, but this effect reached acceptable statistical probability levels,p<0.05 (95% confidence levels), consistently only for the suppository.

The effect of the phenylmercuric acetate suppository on the concentration of vaginal malodorants was statistically valid at 2, 6, and 10 hours after its use. In the case of the douche preparation, the degree of reduction in the malodorant concentrations did not reach statistical significance. A Sign Test, however, on the frequency of the malodorant concentration decreases as compared with the frequency of malodorant concentration increases indicated statistical significance for the decreases at 6 and 10 hours after the use of the douche preparation. The total number of malodorants per sample likewise tended to decrease with the various treatments, but this effect reached statistical significance only for the suppository 6 and 10 hours after the treatment.

Key words

Vaginal odorants Gas chromatography Odor assays Olfactronics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cohen, L.: Influence ofpH on vaginal discharges. Brit. J. vener. Dis.45, 241–246 (1969).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coleman, G. H., Weed, L. A., Myers, C. D.: Bacterial properties of certain organomercuric acetates. J. Amer. chem. Soc.59, 2703–2704 (1937).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dravnieks, A.: Theories of olfaction. In: Chemistry and physiology of flavor, H. W. Schultz, E. A. Day, and L. M. Libby (eds.), p. 95–118. Westport, Conn.: Avi Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dravnieks, A.: Olfaction. In: Medial engineering. Chicago: Yearbook Medical Publishers, Inc. In press.Google Scholar
  5. 4a.
    Dravnieks, A.: Odors as signatures. New Scientist31, 622 (1966).Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    Dravnieks, A., Bock, F. C., Whitfield, Joyce: Contribution of molecular properties of odorants to the hedonic value of their odors. VII Mediteranean Symposium on Odors, May, 1972, Cannes, France.Google Scholar
  7. 6.
    Dravnieks, A., Keith, L., Krotoszynksi, B. K., Shah, J.: Vaginal odors: A gaschromatographic odor assay technique applied to the evaluation of an antiseptic in vivo. J. pharm. Sci., submitted.Google Scholar
  8. 7.
    Dravnieks, A., Krotoszynksi, B. K.: Systematization of analytical and odor data on odorous air. In: Odors and odorants: The engineering view, (Ashrae, ed.), p. 3648. New York 1970.Google Scholar
  9. 8.
    Dravnieks, A., Krotoszynski, B. K., Casely, R. E., Tabor, D.: Gas chromatographic evaluation of intensity of auxillary odors. Toilet Goods Assn. Cosmetic J.1, 14–20 (1969).Google Scholar
  10. 9.
    Dravnieks, A., Krotoszynski, B. K., Keith, L. G., Bush, I.: Odor treshold and gas-chromatographic assays of vaginal odors: Changes with nitrofurazone treatment. J. pharm. Sci.59, 495–501 (1970).Google Scholar
  11. 10.
    Dravnieks, A., Krotoszynski, B. K., Leib, W. E., Jungermann, E.: Influence of a antibacterial soap on various effluents from axillae. J. Cosmetic Chem.19, 611–626 (1969).Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    Dravnieks, A., Krotoszynski, B. K., Whitfield, J., O'Donell, A., Burgwald, T.: High-speed collection of organic vapors from atmosphere. Environmental Sci. Tech.2, 1220–1222 (1971).Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    Dravnieks, A., O'Donnell, A.: Principles and some techniques of high-resolution headspace analysis. J. Agr. Food Chem.19, 1049–1056 (1971).Google Scholar
  14. 13.
    Edmunds, P. N.: The biochemical, serological and haemagglutinating reactions ofHaemophilus vaginalis. J. Path. Bact.83, 411–422 (1962).Google Scholar
  15. 14.
    England, D., Bartizal, F., Keith, L., Fields, C., Brown, E. R.: The presence of corynebacterium, lactobacillus, trichomonas species, and yeast in the external os of pregnant women. Chicago Med. Sch. Quart.31, 5–8 (1972).Google Scholar
  16. 15.
    Fuller, G. H., Steltencamp, R., Tisserand, G. A.: The gas-chromatograph with human sensor: Perfumer model. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci.116, 711–724 (1964).Google Scholar
  17. 16.
    Keith, L., Bush, I. M., Dravnieks, A., Krotoszynski, B. K.: Changes in vaginal odors of six patients under nitrofurazone treatment. J. Reprod. Med.4, 141–148 (1970).Google Scholar
  18. 17.
    Keith, L., Dravnieks, A., Krotoszynski, B. K.: Vaginal odor chromatographic assays; changes caused by douche or suppository-preliminary data. Chicago Med. Sch. Quart.30, 1–11 (1970).Google Scholar
  19. 18.
    Keith, L., England, D., Bartizal, F., Brown, E. R., Fields, C.: Microbial flora of the external os of the premenopausal cervix. Brit. J. vener. Dis.48, 51–56 (1972).Google Scholar
  20. 19.
    Kendall, D. A., Neilson, A. J.: Correlation of subjective and objective odor responses. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci.116, 567–575 (1964).Google Scholar
  21. 20.
    Kurochkin, B. I.: Antimicrobial properties of cervical mucus of pregnant women. Antibiotiki Moskva.14, 929–932 (1969).Google Scholar
  22. 21.
    Lang, W. R.: Vaginal acidity andpH: A review. Obstet. gynec. Surv.10, 546–560 (1955).Google Scholar
  23. 22.
    Langley, R.: Practical statistics, p. 190. New York: Dover Publications Inc. 1971.Google Scholar
  24. 23.
    Kovats, E. S. Z.: Chromatographic characterization of organic substances in the retention index system. Advances Gas Chrom.1, 229–247 (1965).Google Scholar
  25. 24.
    Savage, D. C.: Microbial interference between indigenous yeast andLactobacillus in the rodent stomach. J. Bact.98, 1278–1283 (1969).Google Scholar
  26. 25.
    Singh, E. J., Swartwout, J.: Human cervical mucous lipids. J. Reprod. Med.8, 35–40 (1972).Google Scholar
  27. 26.
    Stevens, S. S.: On the psychophysical law. Psychol. Rev.54, 153–181 (1957).Google Scholar
  28. 27.
    Stevens, S. S.: Psychophysics of sensory function. In: Sensory communication (Rosenblith, ed.)m p. 1–33. Cambridge, Mass.: M. I. T. Press 1961.Google Scholar
  29. 28.
    Woodbine, M.: The comparative antibacterial activity of O-chloromercuriphenol and phenylmercuric acetate. J. Pharm. Pharmacol.2, 376–381 (1950).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© J. F. Bergmann 1973

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Keith
    • 1
    • 5
  • A. Dravnieks
    • 2
  • B. K. Krotoszynski
    • 3
  • Joan Shah
    • 3
  • D. England
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Chicago Medical SchoolUniversity of Health SciencesChicago
  2. 2.Odor Sciences CenterIllinois Institute of Technology Research InstituteChicago
  3. 3.Illinois Institute of Technology Research InstituteChicago
  4. 4.Dept. of OB-GYN, Chicago Medical SchoolUniversity of Health SienceChicago
  5. 5.Cook County HospitalChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations