| Literature DB >> 34220191 |
Marta Bregón-Villahoz1, Maria-Dolores Moragues1, Inés Arrieta-Aguirre1, Mikel Azkargorta2, Lucía Lainz3, Miren Diez-Zapirain3, Maria Iglesias3, Maria-Begoña Prieto3, Ana Matorras4, Antonia Exposito3, Felix Elortza2, Roberto Matorras3,5.
Abstract
Purpose: Some microbiota patterns have been associated with favorable IVF prognosis and others with pathological conditions. The endometrial fluid aspirate (EFA) contains antibacterial proteins that are enriched in implantative IVF cycles, but the antimicrobial effect of EFA has not been addressed. We aimed to evaluate the antimicrobial activity of the human endometrial fluid during the natural cycle.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34220191 PMCID: PMC8221874 DOI: 10.1155/2021/8849664
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol ISSN: 1064-7449
Time distribution, sample characteristics and antimicrobial activity of EFA samples.
| Cycle day | Sample | Activity against microorganismsa | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identification | Catheter tip b | Microbial growth |
|
|
|
|
| MRSA |
|
|
| |
| 5 | EF-05 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | + | - | + | - | - | + |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 10 | EF-07 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | - | ++ | ++ | - | - | - |
| EF-22 | No | No | - | - | - | - | + | + | - | - | - | |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 11 | EF-24 | No | Yes | - | - | - | - | + | - | - | - | +++ |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 12 | EF-23 | No | No | - | - | - | - | + | ++ | - | - | - |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 13 | EF-01 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | ++ | ++ | ++ | +++ | +++ | +++ |
| EF-02 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | - | + | ++ | - | - | - | |
| EF-10 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | - | ++ | + | - | ++ | - | |
| EF-28 | No | No | - | - | - | - | - | + | ++ | - | - | |
| EF-29 | No | No | - | - | - | - | ++ | + | - | - | - | |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 14 | EF-15 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | - | + | + | - | - | - |
| EF-20 | No | No | - | - | - | - | ++ | + | - | - | - | |
| EF-21 | No | Yes | - | - | - | - | + | ++ | +++ | - | - | |
| EF-25 | No | No | - | - | - | + | ++ | ++ | - | - | - | |
| EF-27 | No | No | - | - | + | - | + | ++ | +++ | +++ | +++ | |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 15 | EF-04 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | - | + | ++ | - | ++ | + |
| EF-19 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | - | + | + | - | ++ | - | |
| EF-30 | No | Yes | - | - | - | - | ++ | ++ | - | - | - | |
| EF-37 | No | No | - | - | - | - | ++ | + | - | - | - | |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 16 | EF-03 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | - | + | ++ | - | - | + |
| EF-13 | Yes | Yes | - | - | + | - | + | + | - | - | - | |
| EF-16 | Yes | No | - | - | + | - | ++ | ++ | - | - | - | |
| EF-26 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | - | + | ++ | - | + | ++ | |
| EF-31 | No | Yes | - | - | - | - | ++ | + | - | - | - | |
| EF-35 | No | Yes | - | - | - | - | ++ | ++ | - | - | - | |
| EF-36 | No | Yes | - | - | - | - | ++ | ++ | - | - | - | |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 17 | EF-33 | No | No | - | - | + | - | ++ | + | - | - | - |
| EF-34 | No | No | - | - | - | - | + | + | - | - | - | |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 18 | EF-06 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | - | + | + | - | +++ | + |
| EF-14 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | +++ | + | + | - | - | - | |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 19 | EF-18 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | - | + | + | - | - | - |
| EF-32 | No | No | - | - | - | - | + | + | - | - | - | |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 24 | EF-17 | Yes | No | - | - | - | - | + | + | - | - | - |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 25 | EF-11 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | + | ++ | ++ | - | ++ | - |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 26 | EF-08 | Yes | Yes | - | - | - | - | + | ++ | - | - | + |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 27 | EF-09 | Yes | Yes | - | - | + | - | ++ | + | - | ++ | - |
|
| ||||||||||||
| 28 | EF-38 | No | No | - | - | - | - | ++ | + | - | - | - |
aAntimicrobial activity with reference to the cell pellet of the positive growth control well. -: no inhibition; +: slight inhibition (<50% reduction); ++: moderate to high inhibition (≥50%); +++: full growth inhibition. bCatheter: “yes” stands for samples stored with the catheter tip prior to processing; “no” stands for samples flushed out from the catheter before being stored. Microorganisms: Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Enterococcus faecalis, Streptococcus agalactiae, Staphylococcus aureus, MRSA (Methicillin-resistant S. aureus), Candida albicans, Candida glabrata, and Candida krusei.
Microbial growth of endometrial fluid aspirate (EFA) samples from 38 women on Columbia agar and MRS agar. The ratio of EFA samples displaying microbial growth in both media was significantly higher for those stored with the catheter tip (∗χ2 = 8.44, p < 0.05; ∗∗χ2 = 3.98, p < 0.05) compared to EFA samples flushed out from the catheter.
| Microbial growth of EFA samples on | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Columbia agar | MRS agar | ||||||||
| Positive | Negative | Positive | Negative | ||||||
| EFA samples |
|
| % |
| % |
| % |
| % |
| With catheter tip | 20 | 16 | 80∗ | 4 | 20 | 12 | 60∗∗ | 8 | 40 |
| Flushed out from catheter | 18 | 5 | 27.8 | 13 | 72.2 | 5 | 27.8 | 13 | 72.2 |
| Total | 38 | 21 | 55.3 | 17 | 44.7 | 17 | 44.7 | 21 | 55.3 |
Figure 1Percentage of EFA samples with antimicrobial activity against different microorganisms. Color code refers to the intensity of inhibition as described in Material and Methods (blue: +; yellow: ++; salmon: +++).