4.7 Article

Vaginal Microbiota and In Vitro Fertilization Outcomes: Development of a Simple Diagnostic Tool to Predict Patients at Risk of a Poor Reproductive Outcome

Journal

JOURNAL OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 219, Issue 11, Pages 1809-1817

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiy744

Keywords

Vaginal microbiome; Vaginal microbiota; in vitro fertilization; bacterial vaginosis; infertility; pregnancy

Funding

  1. AP Moller Maersk Foundation
  2. Hospital of Central Jutland Research Fund, Denmark

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Female reproductive tract microbiota may affect human reproduction. The current study considered whether a more detailed characterization of the vaginal microbiota could improve prediction of risk of poor reproductive outcome in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). Methods. Vaginal samples from 120 patients undergoing IVF were sequenced using the V4 region of the 16S ribosomal RNA gene with clustering of Gardnerella vaginalis genomic clades. Abnormal vaginal microbiota was defined by microscopy and quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) for G. vaginalis and/or Atopobium vaginae above a threshold. Results. Three major community state types with abundance of Lactobacillus crispatus, Lactobacillus iners, and a diverse community type were identified, including 2 subtypes, characterized by a high abundance of L. crispatus and L. iners, respectively, but in combination with common diversity type operational taxonomic units. No significant association between community state type and the reproductive outcome could be demonstrated; however, abnormal vaginal microbiota by qPCR and a grouping based on high Shannon diversity index predicted the reproductive outcome equally well. Conclusions. The predictive value of 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing was not superior to the simpler and less expensive qPCR diagnostic approach in predicting the risk of a poor reproductive outcome in patients undergoing IVF.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available