Showing posts with label vagina. Show all posts
Showing posts with label vagina. Show all posts

Sexuality and surgical menopause

This is, perhaps more than any other topic to do with surgical menopause, a great worry for many individuals and it is correspondingly fraught with misinformation, myths, sales pitches, and wishful thinking. As with many things to do with our hormones, you may come here hoping to find simple answers, a magic remedy to restore things as they once were (or, at least, as we wish they had been), and instead find that it is considerably more complicated than that. We're sorry to have to burst that bubble right here at the top, but if simplistic answers are what you are looking for, you will not find that here.

What we're going to do here, then, is talk through some of the things that are important to estrogen-based libido and sexual response, and then look at how we can work our way through those things to develop our own answers to the question of how we can each restore and maintain libido after our surgeries.

Anatomy


The first requirement for sexual arousal and response is having the actual anatomical structures that are necessary to experience them. That maybe sounds overly simplistic, but bear with us: we've had surgery and surgery in real life is not as clear and straightforward as those little graphics in that pamphlet your doctor gave you.
 
In a real belly, things are crowded together. There may be scarring from whatever previous abdominal procedures we might have had, or from the problems that led us to choose a hysterectomy. And not everyone is exactly identical. Most of us have most of the same things in fairly much the same places, but it's not exact: this person's nerve may be right here while another's is slightly over there.

Further, not every surgeon is equally skilled, especially when it comes to vaginal or laparoscopic procedures where access is trickier or where there is a great deal of scarring or other complexity to be sifted through. While they may do a fine job of identifying what they came for, the major organs to be removed, they may be less skilled at identifying and leaving intact those things that are not to be removed.

And, finally, not every surgeon feels that surgically menopaused individuals should have their sexuality preserved. Whether they see it as a personal crusade to help reduce the moral affront of non-reproductive women enjoying sex or whether they genuinely believe they are saving us from the indignity of having what they view as shameful feelings, they may make a decision for us that reflects their own values, without consulting us, and accordingly be less than scrupulous about preserving those nerves and other structures required for sexual response.

For most of us reading this, it may be too late to do anything about our anatomical integrity. Certainly if you are still in the preoperative planning stage and reading this, you should discuss preserving needed sexual structures with your surgeon, frankly and fully, to be sure that you feel confident that your surgeon will follow your wishes in this regard. If he does not seem willing to do so, well, there are many other surgeons in the world.

What if you are postop, though, and wondering about this? This is not the first thing to work on because, let us hasten to assure you, this is not a common outcome of a hysterectomy. It is more likely to be so for a more complex surgery that affects more than "just" removing the uterus (say, removal of extensive endometriosis with heavy scarring, or a radical hysterectomy for cancer). It's probably not the first thing on the troubleshooting list. But it is a possibility that will ultimately need to be considered if hormonal balance measures are ineffective. It's an aspect that many people skip right over, but since it's a make-or-break part of the whole situation, we have to keep it in mind even when we turn our efforts to the more common situations first.

Systemic estrogen


So if the anatomy provides for the basic mechanical equipment for sexuality, it's estrogen that powers it.

Surprised? Thinking that we were going to jump right ahead to testosterone? Nope. That's the single most common error in troubleshooting libido and while we'll get to testosterone eventually, what we're doing here is setting out a hierarchy of needs, each of which builds upon the other in providing for full sexual function. And it's estrogen that really powers full sexuality in estrogen-dominant individuals.

We rely on estrogen to help things throughout our body function normally. Estrogen is so fundamental to our bodies that even cis-men produce and require some estrogen for normal health. While we no longer require enough estrogen to support fertility once we reach menopause, we do still have other, non-fertile needs that must have estrogen to function. And many of those needs specifically relate back to libido.

You can read elsewhere on this site about how estrogen is needed to support normal brain chemical balance. If our brain's needs for estrogen are not met, we are subject to disturbances of mood and thinking and sensation that probably won't let us relax into feelings of arousal and sexuality. So before we can experience libido, we have to have healthy brains that can feel inclination and completion.

Other areas of our wellbeing are equally important to a background level of comfort that will let us even begin to think about engaging in sex. Those of us with low estrogen levels often experience crushing fatigue or joint pains, or lack of sleep due to menopausal symptoms may sap our enthusiasm for, well, anything. To try to force sexual interest when we can barely stand to be inside our bodies is going to be a struggle, and that's not what healthy sexuality should be. No matter how much we or our partners want us to resume sexual activity, it shouldn't be a grit-my-teeth-and-carry-on sort of thing.

And estrogen is required for one more aspect of sexuality, and that's feeling like a sexual individual. Whether you call it femininity or sensuality or desirability or whatever, we need to feel that physicality is desirable. That wholeness of individuality and sensation requires estrogen, and without it, the tenderness and mature sexuality we are looking to regain simply is not there.

But what if you are taking hrt already—isn't that taken care of, then? No. Taking hrt does not mean that you are effectively delivering hormones to your body or that you are delivering the right hormones in the right amounts. HRTs are much more individual than that: every hrt works for somebody, but each of us may find that only a certain few hrts really work well for our own bodies. If this concept is new to you because you've started reading this site here, please use our table of contents to explore the rest of the basic hormonal/hrt background we've provided here—especially the "basics" section at the top.

If you are having symptoms of hormone imbalance, then, or if you have unmet hormone needs apparent despite being on hrt, you may not be providing the fundamental underpinnings for sexuality. Just as we must have the physical structures to actually undergo sexual arousal, we must have our basic systemic hormone needs met well enough to desire sex and to feel arousal. And it is estrogen that provides that hormonal foundation.

Vaginal estrogen


The single most common barrier to full menopausal sexuality is lack of vaginal estrogen. This is where the anatomical structures and our hormones come together, directly at the seat of sexual sensation. Without estrogen here, it's as though the main switch controlling our sexual responsiveness is turned OFF.

Our genitourinary tissues (vagina, bladder, and all their associated nerves, blood vessels, and supporting structures) have a high requirement for estrogen. Without enough estrogen, these tissues lose elasticity, lubrication, sensation, and protective immune response, and they become pale, fragile, thinned and gradually lose function. This situation is called vaginal atrophy and, depending upon the source you read, can affect from 50-75% of all women in menopause, surgical and natural alike.

If you've never heard of vaginal atrophy, don't be surprised: you have plenty of company. Despite this being ridiculously widespread, it's a silent epidemic of deficiency that is ignored by both individuals and physicians. Why? Because many of us are taught to expect that menopause will mean they "dry up down there" and lose sexual interest. They may be embarrassed to raise this subject with their doctor. And their doctor may be equally reluctant to bring up the topic and feel that he's done his job by vaguely inquiring if "everything is alright." While efforts are being made (free signup required to read) within the health care community to raise awareness of the need to deal with vaginal atrophy, we need to do our part by opening the question with our doctors.

But what if we're already taking hrt? Doesn't that take care of the problem? No, not necessarily. At today's lower doses of hrt, we're trying to balance risks and benefits by using just the bare amount that meets our basic systemic hormone needs. That amount, in turn, is very likely not going to be adequate to fully nourish our genitourinary tissues.

The good news about vaginal atrophy is that it is very easily diagnosed by symptoms or visual inspection by your health practitioner. Further, it's easily and very successfully treated with some form of vaginal estrogen supplementation (they all work well, so it's a matter of choosing the method you prefer and can afford). This gives those local tissues a boost without derailing our systemic estrogen balance, and because the dose needed is very very small, it's something that is accessible even to those who must restrict systemic estrogen levels in order to control other risks.

It takes some weeks to fully reverse the effects of low estrogen on vaginal tissues, depending upon whether you choose a maintenance dose product or a treatment dose product. And it typically requires ongoing low maintenance doses to keep those tissues healthy—this isn't a "treat once and done" situation. But once good health is restored, return of sexual sensation and desire often follow. No matter what else we may do to enhance sexual arousal and response, they are unlikely to work until we have healthy genital tissues to experience them. You can read more about vaginal estrogen needs and how to meet them in our discussion of vaginal dryness.

Testosterone


Nothing has greater chic in the hormone world today than testosterone. Estrogen is still on shaky grounds following the massive fear campaign kicked off by superficial interpretations of the results of the Women's Health Initiative Study, despite more recent efforts to provide a more balanced consensus. Progesterone continues to be rejected by many doctors because they fail to understand its uses outside the uterus. But testosterone is in that golden spot enjoyed by estrogen during the middle of the last century, where it is evoked as a magic elixir to cure everything that imbalanced estrogen hrts cannot and not yet overshadowed by any significant sense of risk. Although risks have been demonstrated by medical research, because they have not been popularized in the media the way estrogen risks have been, they are generally unacknowledged by doctors and their patients.

Let us state right here that we are not opposed to the use of testosterone and that we are profoundly grateful for pioneering research done on the topic. Just a few decades ago, it wasn't even proven that women produced their own testosterone and that it had a role in female hormone balance. But much of what was written then is overly simplistic in the light of what we know today about hormone needs and risks. Testosterone can be an answer, but it is not, alas, the invariable answer.

Early research showed that individuals in menopause often had low testosterone levels and when these menopausal people were given testosterone supplements, they scored higher on many measures related to sexual function. As more of us used testosterone, it was also discovered that many of their lingering complaints about lack of energy and strength, even on estrogen hrts, were resolved. So, magic elixir, right?

No. At the same time, more detailed research was not only pointing out the cardiovascular and cancer risks that testosterone use might involve, but it was also showing that those who were low in estrogen were using their testosterone not to do testosterone work, but as raw material to convert to estrogen. In other words, for individuals who have not achieved good hormone balance on their estrogen hrts, testosterone is just another source of estrogen and the improvements that they experienced were due to their estrogen needs being more fully met rather than any effect specific to testosterone.

So how does this fit into working on libido loss? The very important lesson we can take from this research is that until we know that our estrogen needs are fully and satisfactorily met, we cannot know whether or not we are going to get any testosterone-specific benefit from the addition of testosterone to our hrt.

Yes, we know this flies in the face of what compounding pharmacists, who insist they can fix every single hormone imbalance at once, will tell us and it certainly is not what the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture testosterone products want us to believe. That is, however, why the major professional society of endocrinologists, the doctors who are the specialists on hormones and how they function in the body, have said in their position paper on using hrts, that
Androgen deficiency should be diagnosed only in women with adequate estrogen status.
But wait—does that mean that there is no role for testosterone in treating libido? What about all those glowing press releases about that new patch and how it helps so many individuals? The US Food and Drug Administration held off approval of that patch in the US because of concerns about risks, even though it had been approved and for sale for some time in the EU. As of 2014, however, not only has the US FDA rejected the patch licensure application, but Intrinsa, the European patch, is no longer on the market there (although the reasons for the withdrawal have been questioned).

Of course there is a role for testosterone in menopause: if there were not, we wouldn't produce it ourselves. But don't be swayed by those who want to sell you something: that's really all about them, not you. For all of the individuals who responded favorably to the tests for that new patch, there were also those who did not. In fact, testosterone supplementation is effective only for a percentage of women, no matter how it's administered.

We need, then, to look at those who didn't respond just as much as those who did. And, based on research and interpretation of our understanding of hormone physiology, it looks clear that the simple answer is that if a woman doesn't need more testosterone, more is not going to help her. Doesn't that sound a lot like what we say about the other hormones? Exactly: with testosterone, as with every other ovarian hormone, we need only enough to meet our needs; anything more only adds to our risks, not our benefits. If we have enough testosterone already (or would have if we weren't using it to make estrogen out of), more isn't going to make it work any better.

In fact, more testosterone not only raises those risks mentioned above but doesn't really provide for the sexuality we're looking for, even though it may increase our urges. Here's how one of our message list members who was working on their libido with testosterone described the difference:
With testosterone, it looks like it addresses one part of the sexual libido thing — genital stimulation and desire for it — but not the desire for intimacy.... I can vouch for this statement from personal experience — for me that sums up how I felt 100%.

Pulling it all together


Yeah, yeah, you may be saying, but how do I use all of this to troubleshoot my libido? Let's look at that now.

Based on documents like that endocrinologists' position paper and the experiences of women like you who have come to our discussion forums to work on these issues for themselves, here's the order of addressing our hormone needs that seems to be the most efficient and likely to work.
  1. Meet systemic estrogen needs. If we are not fully meeting our needs, we don't have the basic foundation to experience sexuality. For individuals who do not want to or are not able to take hormones, it's important to choose an SSRI (if that's being used in place of hrt) that does not have a libido-suppressing effect. Only once we are at a systemic and brain balance are we ready to work further on restoring libido.
  2. Meet vaginal estrogen needs. If you have dryness or burning or other genital symptoms, you may be suffering from low estrogen to that area. Even if you are not, if you are taking systemic hrt you may not be fully nourishing those tissues. So the first step in troubleshooting this aspect of libido is to ask your doctor for an exam (we're talking visual exam—not a painful or mechanically invasive test) and discussion of vaginal estrogen needs, and raise the question of whether or not you might benefit from some vaginal estrogen. Yes, this may be embarrassing. But many doctors are very willing to discuss this topic with you even if they too are not sure how to open the dialog. So take that first step and you may well find that things are very much easier after that.
         Vaginal estrogen needs are critical to sexual function and are very easy to supplement successfully. For many, this has been the step that has restored sexual function. Yes, just this simple.
  3. Meet testosterone needs. This comes third on our list because it will be ineffective if the other two needs are not met first. And rather than just launching into trying testosterone, this is where we'll reverse our usual stance that questions the value of hormone level tests: it's a good idea to have our circulating blood levels of free testosterone tested. It's a simple blood test that your doctor can order done by a lab.
         While the normal levels are a range, not an absolute, they will give you some guidance as to whether or not you are near adequate in production. Many of those without ovaries are perfectly capable of meeting their menopausal testosterone needs by adrenal output, so it isn't unusual to find that supplementation isn't really needed to reach normal levels once it's not all going to produce estrogen. If we have normal testosterone levels, adding more testosterone is more likely to push us into excess—with its associated significant health risks—than to improve the action of testosterone. So it makes sense that we might consider testing first and only bother with supplementation if we show a demonstrated testosterone shortfall after our estrogen needs are properly met.
         It's also a good idea, because it relates to our cardiovascular risk profile and how testosterone raises those risks, to have our cholesterol and other blood lipids checked when beginning testosterone supplementation. Treatment of elevated levels may be required in order to use testosterone safely, so it's easier to get this additional blood test up front than to find out only after we've had that heart attack.
         We're not going to spell out the different testosterone options and how to use them, since they vary from country to country and to some extent are personal preference. There's more on that on our various testosterone and hrt pages, which you can find in the table of contents.
  4. Consider whether there has been anatomical damage during surgery. This is the last step in the process. If we find that we've got our estrogen needs well met, both systemically and vaginally, and we find that either we don't need more testosterone or that the testosterone we take doesn't make enough difference, then we need to consider whether we have had some sort of damage during surgery that is preventing us from sensing or responding to sexual stimulation. This is a complicated topic, and may require visits to more than one doctor. As a general rule, taking this up with the surgeon who performed our hysterectomy is often not particularly helpful—this doctor may just feel that we're attacking their competence or planning a lawsuit, and they may respond defensively, putting the blame back on us. Since blame has little effective value at this point, that is not an especially satisfying strategy for solving our problem. Instead, many individuals find workups from specialists on pelvic floor medicine helpful, opening up referrals on to neurologists or other surgical specialists depending upon the specific problems identified. It is possible to have some surgical damages corrected, so keeping an open mind going into this process is important: it can take time, but it doesn't mean that you won't ever regain sexual sensation.
So, a long discussion of possibilities and steps, and that's probably not the sort of answer you were hoping for. We'd all like to believe that the magic, whether it's testosterone or some obscure herbal remedy not-available-in-stores, will instantly restore us to the sexual appetites and capabilities of an eager 20-year-old. But in fact, as so many things to do with surgical menopause, it's more complicated than that and there are no universal answers that work for every one of us. Still, the things we have outlined above can help you work through the possibilities in an orderly fashion that has worked for many. Whether your own answer is in estrogen or testosterone or in surgical repairs, there probably is a good answer out there for you. It just takes some work and experimentation and careful recording in your meno journal.

Gleanings from an article on contraceptive patches

Since we're always interested in expanding our understanding of patches and transdermal hormone delivery, we recently clicked through on "Transdermal Contraceptive Patches: Current Status and Future Potential" (free signup required to read) just to see if it had anything to offer that also seemed applicable to hrts.

Delivery from alternative patch placement locations


We've known for some time that butt and belly application differs by 17-25% in the quantity of hormones absorbed from the same patch. This is in the official US FDA patch data sheets. Users have also reported using upper arm and upper back and thighs for patch placement for years, but we're never had any guide other than experimentation to determine the approximate dose equivalency for those locations. This current article, however, lists some of these locations and reports on their delivery:
The patch is designed to be placed on one of four sites: the lower abdomen, upper arm, buttock or upper torso (excluding on the breasts). Two consecutive patches should not be placed over the exact same area. Hormonal absorption from the lower abdomen is approximately 20% lower than that observed from the other three sites
There's no reason at all to suppose that this would not hold true for hrt-sized doses as it does for the higher contraceptive-sized doses referenced in the article. That means that we don't especially need to anticipate making huge changes to our patch dose if we choose to spread our use out over more alternative locations.

What's underneath still matters


This doesn't, of course, guarantee that even the sites with roughly the same statistical deliverability can be trusted to work that way on an individual basis--we still have to contend with individuality of fat-vs-muscle underlayment of the skin to which the patch is applied. That's also supported by this statement from the article:
cautioned that women with body weight in excess of 90 kg may be at higher risk for pregnancy compared with lighter women
In other words, individuals with a thicker fat layer the hormone must traverse to enter circulation may have an overall lower delivery to systemic circulation. For well-padded users, then, a patch may not be an optimal delivery if transmission through thicker fat layers prevents good uptake. Beyond this, though, it supports the notion that underlaying tissue type is pertinent to patch delivery for all users, something that may help in troubleshooting variations in patch performance that result from using multiple locations.

Environmental impact of patch disposal


Also of broader interest is this reminder of the environmental impact of undelivered hormones:
As there is still a considerable amount of hormone left in the patch at the end of its 7-day use, it is recommended that patches not be flushed down toilets, but disposed of folded in half via solid waste collection systems. In some countries, it is recommended that the used patches are returned to pharmacies.
While users in menopause tend to come closer to exhausting the hormone content of their much lower dose patches by the end of the nominal delivery life, we should keep in mind that there may still be enough in them to have impact on others. Our water supplies are growing increasingly contaminated by hormones and drugs, none of which are typically measured (in the US) by EPA-mandated water supply testing. This contamination is increasingly pointed to as a potential factor in the earlier sexual maturity of children and the higher incidence of hormone-mediated disorders we may suffer as adults.

We might be especially concerned about patches discarded prematurely—say, that one that got caught on our underwear on day 1 and peeled up and had to be replaced. But any patch, really, should be disposed of with some care as to where its leftover content might end up, given that it's unfilterable and untested once in our water supplies. Even their suggestion that it go into solid waste disposal would be ineffective in safely sequestering it some places, such as New York City, where much solid waste is simply barged out to sea and dumped. Responsible disposal of our hrts is something to think about for the sake of our children and grandchildren.

Transdermal delivery and the risk of blood clots


The main issue that this article is addressing is risks of blood clots. In general, we know from a growing body of evidence that oral hrts (as compared to transdermal) seem to be associated with a higher incidence of clots, generally attributed to the way that the liver is more heavily involved in oral dose processing. The article reviews that situation:
Estrogen increases VTE risks by altering hepatic production of extrinsic clotting factors, and antithrombin III. With oral contraceptives, hepatic exposure to estrogen is much higher than is reflected by serum estrogen measurements. This is because much of the estrogen absorbed through the intestine into the liver is conjugated and excreted through the gallbladder back into the intestine without ever entering the bloodstream. However, with transdermal systems, all the estrogen to which the liver may be exposed is reflected in the serum levels.
Oral processing is also generally believed to boost inflammatory factors (such as C-reactive protein), which has been suggested as a reason why cancer rates may be higher with orals than other delivery. This is also considered to be a factor in the cardiovascular disease development issue as it relates to route. This research is not yet heavily publicized even though it's incorporated into the major medical group consensus documents on menopause and hrt, so many physicians remain unaware that these are reasons for women to downrate oral hrts when they are evaluating their options.

Transdermal progestins?


We've been discussing progestins lately, both with those who have endometriosis and want to include the suppressive effects of progestogens (progesterone-acting compounds) in their hrt, and with those who have had their ovaries removed but still have an intact uterus and a need to utilize a progestogen to maintain its health.

There's some evidence that progestogens that deliver into pelvic circulation provide better local coverage with lower systemic impact as compared to other routes of systemic delivery, something very attractive where the alternative has long been simply having to tolerate an unpleasant hormone imbalance for the sake of therapeutic effect.

To date, local progestogen delivery has been possible only via IUDs such as Mirena ( dispensing the progestin levonorgestrel) or other higher-dose progestin-dispensing contraceptive IUDs (like Progestasert), or vaginal forms such as the progesterone gel Prochieve, off-label use of oral Prometrium caps vaginally, or various vaginal-application compounded forms of progesterone. That means that for individuals who want the stability of a progestin, which cannot be converted to other hormones as progesterone itself can be, if they didn't have a uterus they were out of luck for anything other than oral delivery and its associated systemic impact.

But this article supports the premise that progestins are in fact capable of being absorbed through the skin (and, by extension because they have similar properties, vaginal lining). Gestodene is the progestin mentioned as being possibly suitable for this kind of delivery in this article and norelgestromin is the progestin in the currently-available patch, but the article also suggests that "other progestins, including those with poor oral absorption, could be utilized in a transdermal patch."

While that doesn't mean that anyone's going to rush a vaginal or transdermal progestin onto the market, especially one suited for the use of those in surgical menopause (a rather small market), it does open up some other avenues for the adventurous to explore.

How? Vaginal use of a portion of a plain progestin tablet meant for oral use might work (it would obviously make sense to try one of the progestins the article mentions unless one can get solid information from a pharmacist that a different progestin is known to be suitable in terms of through-skin absorption capability). Why only a portion? Remember: oral formulations have a lot of wastage from first pass built into them, while lower losses with transdermal delivery mean we have to start at a lower dose level when converting between the two. Clearly, this is really out-on-the-edge experimentation and definitely something to discuss with one's health professionals, but it does provide the hint of a possibility for those willing to experiment a bit in order to get an hrt form and dose they are more comfortable with.

Another approach, although we're not sure if it's feasible or not, would be to see if a compounding pharmacy could custom formulate a progestin meant for oral use into a vaginal-suitable dose and vehicle. We've hesitated suggesting this in the past because we had no reason to suppose it would be absorbed, but given the encouragement of this article, it sounds much more like something to pursue.

Have you tried this? Thinking about trying it? We'd love to hear from you about your experiences on our discussion forum.

Vaginal dryness

Many of us are led to believe that, at menopause, we "just dry up." Our partners may believe this as well. Our doctors certainly do: although the condition that leads to this (we'll talk about that below) is very well known and easily diagnosed, they are apparently so reluctant to do so that incidence has been termed an "epidemic" (free signup required to read link; see also Part 2) by the medical community. With an estimated 50-60% of polled women complaining about this problem, it's not as though we don't have company.

So, what is the problem?


Its proper name is "vaginal atrophy*" or, even more broadly, "urogenital atrophy*" (see bottom of this entry for a new terminology update). Sound scary? Yeah, us too. But what it means is simply deterioration of the tissues of the bladder, vagina, and various supporting structures due to the loss of adequate levels of estrogen in those tissues.

Yes, that area of our bodies is very sensitive to estrogen levels, and after menopause, we simply may not have enough estrogen there to keep those tissues healthy. This happens with natural menopause and it happens with surgical menopause. It even happens when we are taking hrts.

If you did a double-take at that last sentence, you've got lots of company. But in fact current prescribing guidelines for estrogen hrts call for using the lowest dose that meets one's objectives in taking hrt. That's for a good reason: our breast cancer risk seems to correlate fairly well to our lifetime exposure to estrogen, so the least estrogen that works for our needs, the lower our overall risk.

But while that may work out fine for systemic (whole body) needs, it may not cover the very specific needs of these particular tissues. Wouldn't the answer then be to simply take a larger hrt dose so that it would? No, because then that risk goes back up.

Today's typical hrt strategy is to meet our greater vaginal estrogen needs in a different way, one that doesn't do as much to raise overall risks but does serve to keep those critical tissues healthy. That strategy is to use as low a systemic hrt dose as otherwise meets our needs and to supplement that with a second form of estrogen hrt that specifically meets vaginal needs. That means a little more work to manage our hrt and, yes, a little more expense, but the benefit of those costs is meeting all our needs at a lower level of health risk.

Vaginal atrophy: what it does


Let's look a little more closely at what vaginal atrophy really means for us.

Estrogen supports a number of functions in vaginal and urinary tissues. It helps maintain elasticity, moisture, lubrication, immune function, and sensation. Without estrogen, blood vessels shrivel up and become less functional, and our nerves in that area begin to deteriorate. We can't bring blood to initiate the healing processes that protect us from infection. At the same time, these more delicate tissues are even more susceptible to injury or irritation.

That means that without estrogen, vaginal (and to some extent, vulval) tissues become dry all of the time, and hence more irritated by things like soaps or even contact with underwear. It means that we may be more susceptible to infections and it means that we may be more allergic or at least more prone to irritations, rashes, or itching due to contact with products like soaps, fragrances, or laundry products, even ones that we weren't bothered by in the past.

The loss of sensation, caused by the nerves being starved, means that while we may feel irritation just fine, we tend not to feel the pleasurable sensations of arousal or orgasm. "Dead down there" is a common way of expressing this. Because we don't have the capability to respond to arousal with tissue swelling and lubrication, we literally don't feel aroused. And the lack of elasticity and lubrication means that even if we go ahead with penetration, it will be at best uncomfortable and unpleasing, and at worst cause tearing and further irritation. No matter whether or not we provide a systemic "itch" for sexual contact with testosterone, if we can't respond physically because of the effects of low estrogen in these tissues, we will not seek or enjoy sexual relations. We'll talk more about the issue of libido support in another post here, but this is the important relationship: if the equipment isn't working, it doesn't matter how hard you push it. And estrogen is the foundation of "working" here.

So what do we do?


Luckily, treatment of vaginal atrophy is easy, has relatively inexpensive options, and is generally successful within a short time.

HRTs intended specifically to meet vaginal estrogen needs are different from those for systemic needs. It's especially important not to confuse them with products for systemic use that are also delivered through vaginal tissues. Our estrogens HRTs page distinguishes these, so check out your brands there to make sure you've got the correct one for your intentions: even health practitioners have been known to mix this up.

Vaginal estrogen HRTs are all designed to be delivered in vehicles that are non-irritating to atrophied vaginal tissues and well-absorbed by them. Even more importantly, they deliver only a very low dose of estrogen, only enough to meet the local tissue needs. The objective of this is to have all of the dose absorbed and used in those local tissues rather than being passed along to systemic circulation. And that means that adding a vaginal estrogen supplement doesn't mean making an adjustment to our systemic HRT to take that addition into account.

It also means—and this is important—that we can use it intermittently. Our systemic HRT, you'll remember from discussions elsewhere on this site, needs to be kept at a fairly consistent level to avoid causing symptoms from fluctuating hormone levels. But because vaginal HRTs don't affect systemic levels, they can be used only as often as needed to provide the level of maintenance coverage we turn out to need.

Most vaginal HRTs are given at a relatively frequent dose interval, usually daily, for a six- to eight-week period. This provides a steady supply of estrogen to promote recovery of health.
Often, we use a cream for this treatment phase: it spreads out well and provides maximal contact with tissues. Further, these are older products and doctors are more familiar and comfortable with them, hence more likely to prescribe them.

Other options are available, however: typically these are rings and vaginal tablets, either retail prescription or compounded. While they may be less messy than creams, because they are low doses meant for maintenance, this first, treatment phase can take longer with these forms. Whether or not this is a good idea for any particular individual really depends upon just how uncomfortable they are and how rapidly they want to turn things around.

It's perfectly legitimate to use a combined approach: a cream for the treatment phase and then a switch to another form for long term maintenance. Alternatively, one can continue using a cream and simply use a smaller amount of it at a less frequent interval, making it less messy and inconvenient. All of the commercial vaginal estrogen HRTs work, so it's really a matter of preference.

What we can expect from vaginal estrogen supplementation


Beginning vaginal estrogen HRT can sometimes be annoying and uncomfortable. Some individuals have such damaged tissues that even the creams, meant to be non-irritating, are too much to tolerate immediately. If you have a reaction of burning or rash upon beginning any vaginal HRT, by all means call your doctor right away and ask for something else: it's not an effect that will go away quickly and there's no point to suffering. If nothing else, a compounding pharmacy can make you a preparation containing the same amount of estrogen as the retail products, but in a hypoallergenic base. In extreme situations, we may need to use the cream externally only for a period, and then gradually increase penetration to progressively treat vaginal tissues.

It's not at all uncommon to see reports of vaginal infections in the early weeks of treatment. These are due to the impaired immune function recovering at a different pace from other aspects of tissue healing, such that the vagina becomes a fertile place for bacterial growth before we're really able to fight those bacteria off. Additionally, using the cream runs the risk of introducing infections through the applicator and tube if we are not careful with their cleanliness.

Infection is not a contraindication for continued HRT use, however, and infections can (and should) be treated at the same time. It may take more than one round of treatment before health is restored and we require less intervention, so some persistence can be needed to see this process through. What's important to keep in mind, though, is that it's not the new vaginal HRT causing the infections (this is a common misunderstanding), but rather, it's the stage of healing that actually makes us susceptible to the infections.

Now, we've said above that the idea of the low dose level of these products is so that they will be consumed entirely locally, without systemic impact. And that's true. Except, maybe not so much at first. When we first begin treating established vaginal atrophy, those tissues may have lost enough of their circulatory capacity that they can't pick up and distribute all of the estrogen quickly enough and some of it does "leak" into systemic use. We may experience a few hot flashes from the fluctuation in our systemic levels, or see a slight shift in our usual state of balance.

But because even atrophied tissues can benefit from the estrogen they absorb, healing is happening. And as those tissues recover, they'll use more and more of the dose until that state of total local use is achieved. For this reason, it's generally not considered to be a situation in which we should modify our systemic HRT intake. It's temporary and so long as we're not miserably uncomfortable, we don't need to change anything; we can wait it out, knowing it's time-limited and will gradually be resolving.

So we use the HRT daily for those six to eight weeks and find that things are feeling considerably better. Normal lubrication should be restored and sensation should also be more normal, assuming we experienced no actual nerve damage from our surgeries. Now it's time for maintenance mode.

Our doctors will tell us to use our maintenance vaginal HRT on a less frequent schedule and may suggest once or twice a week. But that's only a rough guess, and we each have to consider tuning that to create our own best schedule.

If we're still using cream, we can also work on determining a reduced dose. What we hear most often is something like "a pea-sized dab a couple times a week," which is pretty vague but is an okay general guess to work from.

For those using a ring, of course, the dose is taken care of (although it's important not to neglect change dates).

For tablet users, the frequency is the only factor to be adjusted, but once to twice a week still seems to be where most users start. If symptoms of dryness or other hallmarks of atrophy return, it should be obvious that the dose or frequency or both should be stepped up a bit. If twice a week is seeming good, it might be reasonable to step down a bit to twice every week and a half, just to make sure that we're not using more than we need. In other words: we feel our way along, looking for our personal bottom limit and then aiming just above that.

The fine print


Great, so what are the drawbacks? Yeah, it's never a free lunch with menopause, so you knew there would likely be a catch or two.

In this case, vaginal atrophy treatment has to lead into vaginal health maintenance, which means that we will need it more or less the rest of our lives—or, at least, until our hormone needs drop so low as to no longer require supplementation. Maintenance requires a lower dose, generally accomplished by a longer dose interval and/or a change of product after initial healing takes place. If we stop using our vaginal estrogen supplement, our atrophy will return: this is an ongoing need, not a "disease" that we will "cure" with a one-time treatment. Just as we have to eat every day to keep nourishing our bodies, so we have to keep providing the estrogen needed to nourish vaginal health.

Vaginal estrogen supplementation isn't for everyone. Those of us who have hormone-sensitive risks in the pelvic area, such as endometriosis, are generally discouraged from using vaginal hrts because they concentrate potentially higher levels of hormones in pelvic circulation.

Those at high risk for estrogen-stimulated cancers anywhere in their bodies who are being treated by estrogen exposure restriction, either by withholding estrogen supplementation or by drugs that specifically combat estrogen exposure, used to be routinely advised not to use vaginal estrogens. Although these products nominally are fully consumed by local tissues and don't spill over into systemic circulation and hence risk, enough has been shown to escape to raise the fear that this might be just enough to help a tumor cell survive. In fact, the North American Menopause Society, in their 2017 position statement on hrt (that was cosigned worldwide) said:

Because of the potential risk of small increases in circulating estrogens, the decision to use low-dose vaginal ET [estrogen therapy] in women with breast cancer should be made in conjunction with their oncologists. This is particularly important for women on aromatase inhibitors (AIs) with suppressed plasma levels of estradiol, although no increased risk was seen in an observational trial of survivors of breast cancer on tamoxifen or AI therapy with low-dose vaginal ET during 3.5 years’ mean follow-up.
One other concern we've heard voiced is about transferring hormones to our partners. Yes, this can happen if a cream dose is still present at adequate hormone levels. Timing of use can help manage this. The ring for this use releases such a low level of output that it's certified as safe enough to leave in during intercourse (although you may, of course, remove it if either partner prefers). Otherwise yes, some care is needed but so long as the HRT isn't freshly applied and still present in volume, it's believed that the risk is minimal. For 100% protection, however, a condom can be used as a barrier.

But isn't there some natural solution?


That kind of depends on what you mean by "natural." Since it's loss of our natural estrogen that causes vaginal atrophy, we can't really think of anything more natural than simply replacing that supply.

But perhaps what you mean is you prefer something you can purchase over the counter, something made from a blend of herbs, something that doesn't carry the risk of hormones. In that case, we're sorry to have to tell you that this doesn't exist. There is no substance, whether grown in a plant or refined in a lab that can fulfill vaginal estrogen needs other than real human-type estrogen. Yes, there are many sales websites that will try to tell you differently, but in fact these products do not address the specific need for estrogen and so will not treat vaginal atrophy.

Lubricants or vaginal moisturizers may feel soothing, but will not actually promote healing or improve the other physical damages of vaginal atrophy. Some things of this type that users have found useful include commercial moisturizers, commercial lubricants, vitamin E capsules, or small balls of (chilled to harden) coconut oil. These can be good things to try if your other options are limited or you believe that dryness is the only symptom you're experiencing, but they aren't really treatments for vaginal atrophy.

Douching, especially with perfumed products, is not recommended in vaginal atrophy because douche solutions can actually damage tissues further and increase infection risk. Similarly, while douching with live-culture yogurt or other probiotic agents may help restore a good flora balance after health is restored, they will not alone restore that health and will not do so durably.

Must it be treated? Of course not. It's up to us to choose what we consider important. Some have said they feel the loss of sexual responsiveness grants them a return to a purer, more childlike condition. Others don't find the symptoms troubling or find that simple over the counter lubricants and a switch to unscented washing products are adequate to deal with the degree of atrophy that develops.

Each of us gets to decide these things for themself. What we want you to know, however, is that this is a treatable condition, not a life sentence. Menopause does not mean "dead down there" or intractable pain. If you aren't happy with the state of your vaginal health, it needs to start by speaking up. Yes, we know it's hard if you're not used to discussing this part of your body or your sexual needs. You may be embarrassed, or you may worry that your doctor may make you feel wanton or unclean. But this is perfectly normal physiology and your doctor really should be a mature enough individual to handle such a request politely and smoothly. In fact, shame on them for not asking directly whether you need treatment of this kind in the first place. At some point, though, one or the other of you needs to suck it up and just raise the question, and since you're the one who's hurting, yes, we're looking at you.

Not sure what to say? How about something along the lines of "Doctor, I'm concerned about developing vaginal atrophy. Lately I've been experiencing dryness and loss of sensation, and I'd like to consider using some supplemental vaginal estrogen to help keep things healthy. Would you write me a prescription for this?"

More questions?


We have a number of bookmarked articles on this topic in our general bookmarks account, and you may find it helpful to do more reading on this.

Beyond this, we're always happy to discuss specifics on our forums, so feel free to join us there.

*Update: A new name for this has been proposed for this condition, GSM or "Genitourinary Syndrome of Menopause." This doesn't represent a change in thinking about treatment, but it is hoped that it will make it easier to discuss. You can read more about this proposed change in terminology in a separate entry.