Cited by 269Advanced Drug Delivery SystemsReproductive Health and ContraceptionAdvancements in Transdermal Drug Delivery

Why consider vaginal drug administration?

Open access
Alexander, Nancy J, Baker, Edward, Kaptein, Marc, Karck, Ulrich, Miller, Leslie, Zampaglione, Edio·2004·Fertility and Sterility

Abstract

Objective To review the anatomy and physiology of the vagina, the merits of vaginal drug administration, and the currently available vaginal drug-administration systems.Design Review of basic and clinical research.Result(s) Although clinicians commonly use topically administered drugs in the vagina, this route for systemic drug administration is somewhat novel. Experience with a variety of products demonstrates that the vagina is a highly effective site for drug delivery, particularly in women's health. The vagina is often an ideal route for drug administration because it allows for the administration of lower doses, steady drug levels, and less frequent administration than the oral route. With vaginal drug administration, absorption is unaffected by gastrointestinal disturbances, there is no first-pass effect, and use is discreet. Knowledge of anatomy, physiology, histology, and immunology of the vagina should allow clinicians to reassure their patients concerning this mode of delivery. Greater understanding and experience by clinicians should lead to increased use and acceptance of the vagina as a route for drug administration.Conclusion(s) The safety and efficacy of vaginal administration have been well established. The vaginal route of drug delivery is acceptable and may even be a preferable route of administration for many drugs, particularly hormones, whether for contraception or postmenopausal estrogen therapy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.01.025

Cites

116 of 116 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alexander, N. J., Baker, E., Kaptein, M., Karck, U., Miller, L., & Zampaglione, E.
Affiliations
  • Rutgers New Jersey Medical School (US)
  • Klinikum Stuttgart (DE)
  • University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Alexander, Nancy J
Venue
Fertility and Sterility
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-07
Volume
82
Issue
1
Pages
1-12
ISSN
0015-0282 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1981676903
Cited by
269
References
116
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 11
FWCI
0.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Fertility and Sterility (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Pfizer
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Advanced Drug Delivery Systems
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Advancements in Transdermal Drug Delivery
Keywords
vaginal administration, vaginal absorption, first-pass metabolism avoidance, women's health, hormonal contraception, postmenopausal estrogen therapy
MeSH terms
Administration, Intravaginal, Contraceptive Devices, Female, Equipment Design, Female, Humans, Hydrogen-Ion Concentration, Immune System, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Vagina, Estrogen Replacement Therapy, Drug Delivery Systems, History, 20th Century

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review