Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33806442›Full record

ReviewPathogens (Basel, Switzerland)2021

The Association between Vaginal Dysbiosis and Reproductive Outcomes in Sub-Fertile Women Undergoing IVF-Treatment: A Systematic PRISMA Review and Meta-Analysis.

Axel Skafte-Holm, Peter Humaidan, Andrea Bernabeu, Belen Lledo, Jørgen Skov Jensen, Thor Haahr

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. All Properties of Infertility Microbiome in a Review Article.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Axel Skafte-HolmDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Denmark and the Fertility Clinic Skive, Skive Regional Hospital, 7800 Skive, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-6759-2758
Peter HumaidanDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Denmark and the Fertility Clinic Skive, Skive Regional Hospital, 7800 Skive, Denmark.
Andrea BernabeuThe Fertility Clinic, Instituto Bernabeu, 03016 Alicante, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-9427-6360
Belen LledoThe Fertility Clinic, Instituto Bernabeu, 03016 Alicante, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-3583-7893
Jørgen Skov JensenStatens Serum Institute, Research Unit for Reproductive Microbiology, 2300 Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-7464-7435
Thor HaahrDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Denmark and the Fertility Clinic Skive, Skive Regional Hospital, 7800 Skive, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-9304-5299

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent advances in molecular microbiology have enabled refined studies of the genital tract microbiota. This constitutes the basis of the present updated systematic review and meta-analysis which investigate vaginal dysbiosis (VD) as defined by either microscopy (e.g., Nugent score for bacterial vaginosis) or molecular methods (qPCR and Next Generation Sequencing) to evaluate the impact of VD on the reproductive outcomes in women undergoing IVF-treatment. A total of 17 studies were included, comprising 3543 patients and with a VD prevalence of 18% (95%CI 17-19). Across all methods, VD is a significant risk factor for early pregnancy loss in IVF (Relative risk (RR) = 1.71 95%CI 1.29-2.27). Moreover, a predefined sub-analysis of studies using molecular methods for VD diagnosis showed a significant reduction in the clinical pregnancy rate when compared to normal vaginal microbiota patients (RR = 0.55 95%CI 0.32-0.93). However, regardless of diagnostic methodology, VD did not significantly influence live birth rate (LBR). In conclusion, molecular tools have provided a more detailed insight into the vaginal microbiota, which may be the reason for the increased adverse effect estimates in IVF patients with molecularly defined VD. However, the quality of evidence was very low across all outcomes according to GRADE and thus, more studies are warranted to understand the impact of VD in IVF.

Indexed as

bacterial vaginosisclinical pregnancy rateIVFnext generation sequencingqPCRvaginal microbiota

Identifiers

PMID33806442
PMCPMC8001118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.