Sexual, relational, and psychological functioning in male partners of women with reported Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser syndrome—a case–control study

STUDY QUESTION Do sexual, relational, and psychological functioning of male partners of women with Mayer–Rokitansky–Küster–Hauser (MRKH) syndrome differ from male partners of women without MRKH syndrome? SUMMARY ANSWER Male partners of women with MRKH syndrome did not significantly differ in sexual functioning but reported higher relational satisfaction and less anxiety than the control group. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY To date, only a few studies have reported occasionally about sexual, psychological, and relational functioning of partners of women with MRKH syndrome. The results seem to suggest sexual satisfaction in these men, contrary to the more often reported insecurities in women with MRKH syndrome surrounding sexuality and relationships. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION In this case–control study, 42 male partners of women with MRKH syndrome and 40 partners of women without the condition were enrolled. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS All participants were recruited through women with MRKH syndrome and age-matched women without the condition who participated in a previous case–control study on sexual, psychological, and relational functioning. Participants live in a heterosexual relationship for at least in the last 6 months and have a basic understanding of the Dutch language. They were administered a set of online questionnaires to assess sexual, relational, and psychological functioning. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Partners of women with MRKH syndrome did not differ significantly in overall sexual functioning and had similar percentages of sexual dysfunction and sexual distress as the control group. Partners of women with MRKH syndrome reported significantly less relational dissatisfaction (P = 0.01; Cohen’s d = 0.6) than partners of women without the condition. There was no significant difference in overall psychological functioning or the presence of clinically relevant anxiety and depression, but the men in the MRKH group had a significantly lower anxiety score (P = 0.01; Cohen’s d = 0.6). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION We were not able to reach a sample size needed for enough power to detect small to medium effect sizes. Confounding factors and selection bias cannot be excluded. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The study offers new knowledge on a perspective that remains underexposed so far, which makes comparison to previous literature difficult. More research is needed to apply the results in clinical practice. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This research was supported by the Dutch Scientific Society of Sexology (Nederlandse Wetenschappelijke Vereniging Voor Seksuologie). There was no involvement in the conduct of the research, and the funding was unrestricted. There are no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.