Abstract
Objectives: To validate a simplified grading scheme for Gram stained smears of vaginal fluid for the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis (BV) against the accepted "gold" standard of Amsel's composite criteria.
Methods: Women attending genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics, as part of a multicentre study, were diagnosed as having BV if three or more of the following criteria were present; homogeneous discharge, elevated vaginal pH, production of amines, and presence of "clue" cells. Women with less than three of the criteria were considered as normal. Simultaneously, smears were made of vaginal fluid and Gram stained and then assessed qualitatively as normal (grade I), intermediate (grade II), or consistent with BV (grade III). Two new grades were used, grade 0, epithelial cells only with no bacteria, and grade IV, Gram positive cocci only.
Results: BV was diagnosed in 83/162 patient visits using the composite criteria, the remainder being regarded as normal. The majority of patients with BV had a smear assessed as grade III (80/83, 96%) and the majority of normal women had a smear assessed as grade I (normal, 48/79, 61%), giving a high sensitivity (97.5%), specificity (96%), and predictive value for a positive (94.1%) and negative (96%) test, kappa index = 0.91. Smears assessed as grade II were found predominantly (12/13) among patients diagnosed as normal, with less than three of the composite criteria. Grades 0 and IV were both only found among normal women.
Conclusion: This simplified assessment of Gram stained smears can be used as an alternative to Amsel's criteria and is more applicable for use in busy GUM clinics.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (91.3 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Amsel R., Totten P. A., Spiegel C. A., Chen K. C., Eschenbach D., Holmes K. K. Nonspecific vaginitis. Diagnostic criteria and microbial and epidemiologic associations. Am J Med. 1983 Jan;74(1):14–22. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(83)91112-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- GARDNER H. L., DUKES C. D. Haemophilus vaginalis vaginitis: a newly defined specific infection previously classified non-specific vaginitis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1955 May;69(5):962–976. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hay P. E., Lamont R. F., Taylor-Robinson D., Morgan D. J., Ison C., Pearson J. Abnormal bacterial colonisation of the genital tract and subsequent preterm delivery and late miscarriage. BMJ. 1994 Jan 29;308(6924):295–298. doi: 10.1136/bmj.308.6924.295. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hay P. E., Morgan D. J., Ison C. A., Bhide S. A., Romney M., McKenzie P., Pearson J., Lamont R. F., Taylor-Robinson D. A longitudinal study of bacterial vaginosis during pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1994 Dec;101(12):1048–1053. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1994.tb13580.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hillier S. L., Krohn M. A., Nugent R. P., Gibbs R. S. Characteristics of three vaginal flora patterns assessed by gram stain among pregnant women. Vaginal Infections and Prematurity Study Group. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992 Mar;166(3):938–944. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(92)91368-k. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Nugent R. P., Krohn M. A., Hillier S. L. Reliability of diagnosing bacterial vaginosis is improved by a standardized method of gram stain interpretation. J Clin Microbiol. 1991 Feb;29(2):297–301. doi: 10.1128/jcm.29.2.297-301.1991. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pheifer T. A., Forsyth P. S., Durfee M. A., Pollock H. M., Holmes K. K. Nonspecific vaginitis: role of Haemophilus vaginalis and treatment with metronidazole. N Engl J Med. 1978 Jun 29;298(26):1429–1434. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197806292982601. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rosenstein I. J., Morgan D. J., Sheehan M., Lamont R. F., Taylor-Robinson D. Bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy: distribution of bacterial species in different gram-stain categories of the vaginal flora. J Med Microbiol. 1996 Aug;45(2):120–126. doi: 10.1099/00222615-45-2-120. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Schwebke J. R., Hillier S. L., Sobel J. D., McGregor J. A., Sweet R. L. Validity of the vaginal gram stain for the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis. Obstet Gynecol. 1996 Oct;88(4 Pt 1):573–576. doi: 10.1016/0029-7844(96)00233-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Spiegel C. A., Amsel R., Holmes K. K. Diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis by direct gram stain of vaginal fluid. J Clin Microbiol. 1983 Jul;18(1):170–177. doi: 10.1128/jcm.18.1.170-177.1983. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Thomason J. L., Anderson R. J., Gelbart S. M., Osypowski P. J., Scaglione N. J., el Tabbakh G., James J. A. Simplified gram stain interpretive method for diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992 Jul;167(1):16–19. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(11)91617-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]