Efficacy and safety of visnadine in the treatment of symptoms of sexual dysfunction in heterosexual women: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials

Abstract

Objective

To synthesize the primary evidence on the efficacy and safety of visnadine on symptoms of sexual dysfunction (SD) in heterosexual women.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with a primary search without language restriction in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and international clinical trial registries. Trials reporting the use of visnadine by any route in women with SD were eligible. We performed screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment in a double-blind approach. The primary outcomes were the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and its domains. Secondary outcomes were safety, arousal, lubrication, pleasure, orgasm, negative sensations, duration, and overall satisfaction.

Results

Initially, 242 records were retrieved. We selected nine papers for full-text reading and finally included two RCTs: one with a parallel design and one with a crossover design with a total of 96 patients. One study compared visnadine aerosol with a placebo, while the other compared different frequencies of visnadine aerosol use. Visnadine use showed a statistically significant improvement (p < 0.05) in overall FSFI scores, regardless of the frequency of use. A meta-analysis was not possible due to the high clinical and methodological heterogeneity between available studies.

Conclusion

RCTs regarding the use of visnadine for the Female SD are scarce and methodologically limited. This preliminary evidence shows visnadine as a potentially effective and safe option to alleviate some of the clinical symptoms of SD in heterosexual women. However, future better-designed randomized studies with larger sample numbers are required.

Keywords:

• Female sexual dysfunction
• female sexual function index
• FSFI
• sex dysfunction
• systematic review
• visnadine
• women’s health

Acknowledgment

None.

Authors’ contribution

BCC: investigation, data curation and visualization, drafting, review, editing, and approval of the final version. DFG: investigation, data curation and visualization, drafting, review, editing, and approval of the final version. HGP: investigation, data curation and visualization, drafting, review, editing, and approval of the final version. VABZ: methodology, project management and supervision; drafting, review, editing, and approval of the final version. FRPL: methodology, drafting, review, editing, and approval of the final version. JEB: methodology, drafting, review, editing, and approval of the final version. EMH: idea conceptualization, investigation, methodology, project management, writing, revision, editing, and approval of the final version.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

Not applicable as this was a systematic review and meta-analysis of publications found in the literature.

Additional information

Funding

None.