| Literature DB >> 34632426 |
Ashley M Eskew1,2, Molly J Stout3,4, Bronwyn S Bedrick1,5, Joan K Riley1, Brandi N Herter6, Haley Gula6, Emily S Jungheim1,7, Kristine M Wylie6,8.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether prophylactic azithromycin is associated with the vaginal bacterial microbiome and clinical outcomes in subfertile women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF).Entities:
Keywords: IVF outcomes; Vaginal microbiome; prophylactic antibiotics; reproductive microbiome
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34632426 PMCID: PMC8494411 DOI: 10.1016/j.xfss.2021.01.002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: F S Sci ISSN: 2666-335X
Demographic and clinical characteristics of study participants.
| Variable | No antibiotic (n = 15) | Antibiotic (n = 12) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (y), mean (SD) | 32.27 (3.8) | 35.25 (4.67) | .07 |
| BMI (kg/m2), mean (SD) | 30.94 (8.1) | 30.48 (7) | .88 |
| Race, no. (%) | 1 | ||
| White | 14 (93.3) | 12 (100) | |
| Asian | 1 (6.7) | 0 (0) | |
| Ethnicity, no. (%) | |||
| Non-Hispanic | 15 (100) | 12 (100) | |
| Duration of infertility (mo), median (IQR) | 24 (18, 48) | 18 (8, 32) | .20 |
| Diagnosis, no. (%) | .35 | ||
| Male factor | 5 (33.3) | 3 (25) | |
| Unexplained | 1 (6.7) | 4 (33.3) | |
| Tubal factor | 2 (13.3) | 1 (8.3) | |
| Endometriosis | 1 (6.7) | 1 (8.3) | |
| Ovulatory dysfunction | 1 (6.7) | 1 (8.3) | |
| PCOS | 4 (26.7) | 0 | |
| DOR | 1 (6.7) | 2 (16.7) | |
| Protocol, no. (%) | .05 | ||
| Long agonist | 9 (60) | 7 (58.3) | |
| Antagonist | 5 (33.3) | 1 (8.3) | |
| Flare | 0 | 4 (33.3) | |
| Luteal E2 flare | 1 (6.7) | 0 | |
| Prior live birth, no. (%) | 1[ | ||
| Yes | 3 (20) | 2 (16.7) | |
| No | 12 (80) | 10 (83.3) |
Note: BMI = body mass index; DOR = diminished ovarian reserve; E2 = estradiol; IQR = interquartile range; SD = standard deviation; PCOS polycystic ovary syndrome; SD standard deviation.
Fisher’s exact test.
Cycle-level variables.
| Variable | No antibiotic (n = 15) | Antibiotic (n = 12) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMH (ng/mL), mean (SD) | 2.16 (1.15) | 1.47 (0.62) | .07 |
| Total gonadotropin (U), mean (SD) | 2,525 (1,315) | 2,893 (1,005) | .43 |
| Peak estradiol (pg/mL), mean (SD) | 2,255 (1,068) | 2,005 (825) | .51 |
| Day of embryo transfer, no. (%)[ | .24[ | ||
| 3 | 7 (50) | 9 (75) | |
| 5 | 7 (50) | 3 (25) | |
| No. of embryos transferred, median (IQR) | 1 (1, 2) | 2 (1, 2) | .06 |
Note: AMH = antimüllerian hormone; IQR = interquartile range; SD = standard deviation.
Out of 14 in the no-antibiotic group.
Fisher’s exact test.
IVF outcomes.
| Variable | No antibiotic (n = 15) | Antibiotic (n = 12) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| No. of eggs retrieved | 14 (5, 20) | 10 (7, 14) | .25 |
| No. of mature eggs | 11 (4, 14) | 9 (7, 11) | .52 |
| Fertilization rate, mean (SD) | 6.3 (4.5) | 6.7 (3.3) | .83 |
| No. of blastocysts | 1 (0, 4) | 0 (0, 3) | .32 |
| No. cryopreserved | 1 (0, 3) | 0 (0, 3) | .27 |
| Blastocyst utilization rate[ | 0.25 (0, 0.5) | 0 (0, 0.5) | .26 |
Note: IQR = interquartile range; IVF = in vitro fertilization; SD = standard deviation.
All values are expressed as median (IQR) unless designated otherwise. Mann-Whitney U test (nonparametric) was performed for discrete numbers.
Out of 14 in the no-antibiotic group.
Clinical outcomes.
| Variable | No antibiotic (n = 15) | Antibiotic (n = 12) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical pregnancy, no. (%) | 9 (60) | 7 (58.3) | .93 |
| Implantation rate, mean (SD) | 0.57 (0.47) | 0.4 (0.42) | .3 |
| Miscarriage, no. (%) | 0 | 1 (3.7) | .44[ |
| Live births, no. (%) | 9 (60) | 5 (41.7) | .45 |
Note: SD = standard deviation.
Fisher’s exact test.
FIGURE 1Vaginal bacterial community structures in patients undergoing IVF over 3 sampling intervals. The relative abundance of each taxon is represented by a different color. The sequential samples obtained from each subject are represented in a group, with sample A collected at baseline, B just before egg retrieval, and C just before embryo transfer. Subjects who did not undergo prophylactic azithromycin treatment are marked with a black bar labeled “NA,” and those receiving azithromycin are marked with a gray bar labeled “AZ.” Within each of these groups, subjects who did or did not become pregnant are annotated. According to Linear discriminant analysis Effect Size analysis, no specific taxa were associated with azithromycin treatment or pregnancy. IVF = in vitro fertilization.
FIGURE 2Alpha diversity and community stability were not associated with azithromycin treatment. Shannon diversity (A–C) and Bray-Curtis dissimilarity (D–F) are plotted using box and whisker plots to compare the azithromycin and no-azithromycin groups. The median is indicated by a horizontal line, quartiles by boxes, and minimum and maximum by whiskers. Shannon diversities are shown for samples collected at the time of enrollment (panel A), egg retrieval (panel B), and embryo transfer (panel C). Bray-Curtis dissimilarities (representing the degree of change in community structure) are shown for the time period between enrollment and egg retrieval (D), egg retrieval and embryo transfer (E), and enrollment and embryo transfer (F).
FIGURE 3Bacterial community characteristics associated with pregnancy. Shannon diversity (A), 16S rRNA gene copy number (B), the percentage of Lactobacillus species in the samples (C), and the Bray-Curtis dissimilarity measure (D) are represented by box and whisker plots to compare groups based on azithromycin treatment and pregnancy outcome. The median is indicated by a horizontal line, quartiles by boxes, and minimum and maximum by whiskers. In the azithromycin group, the percentage of Lactobacillus species was statistically significantly different between the pregnant and nonpregnant groups (P = .048; HL, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.08–0.65). CI = confidence interval; HL = Hodges-Lehmann estimate of difference.