SynthesisBMC women's health2026
Oral versus topical maintenance antifungal therapy for recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC women's health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Oral versus topical maintenance antifungal therapy for recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC women's health · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis is a substantial personal and healthcare burden. This systematic review assessed the effects of topical versus oral maintenance antifungal therapy in women with recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis to improve outcomes.
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of bibliographic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE/PubMed), citation indexes (Web of Science, Scopus), and clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP) from inception to March 2025, without language or publication status restrictions. We screened reference lists of relevant studies and systematic reviews. We included randomized trials comparing topical versus oral maintenance antifungal therapy for recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis. Three reviewers independently screened the records, assessed the full texts, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with no clinical or mycological recurrence at the end of follow-up. We performed a common-effect meta-analysis. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence and generate a summary of findings table.
resultsWe identified six eligible trials (1224 participants), five completed trials with results (792 participants) and one completed trial awaiting results (432 participants). All studies included women with recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis. In the oral arm, five studies used fluconazole and one study used itraconazole. In the topical arm, three studies used clotrimazole, one used a combination of clotrimazole-diclofenac, one used fenticonazole, and one used nystatin. Five studies continued outcome measurement for six months after completion of the maintenance phase. Most of the included studies were judged to be at high risk of bias. The pooled estimates of the effects are not significantly different across all outcomes, including clinical or mycological recurrence, satisfaction, and adverse events. The evidence for all outcomes was very uncertain due to serious methodological concerns and imprecision.
conclusionsThe evidence is very uncertain about the benefits and harms of oral versus topical antifungal maintenance therapy for women with recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis. Given the substantial personal and healthcare burden of the condition, the uncertainty of the evidence leaves a crucial gap in guidance for clinicians and patients when choosing a maintenance strategy. REVIEW REGISTRATION: OSF osf.io/g7fzy .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.