Ureaplasma urealyticum and Mycoplasma hominis infections and semen quality in 19,098 infertile men in China

Abstract

Clinical assessment revealed a significant relationship between UU and MH infections and male infertility. UU was found to significantly affect sperm quality, but this was not the case with MH. Doxycycline and josamycin should be preferred for clinically treating UU and MH infections.

Should we be testing for urogenital Mycoplasma hominis, Ureaplasma parvum and Ureaplasma urealyticum in men and women? – a position statement from the European STI Guidelines Editorial Board

“…Instead, 'true' STIs and BV in symptomatic women should be diagnosed and treated. Well-designed, large, randomized controlled studies to investigate unresolved issues regarding M. hominis, U. parvum and/ or U. urealyticum and their independent associations with STI syndromes and complications such as possibly infertility, [33][34][35] PID and prostate cancer [81][82][83][84] could be valuable. In these studies, it is recommended to control age, sexual behaviour (number and change in sexual partners), use quantitative molecular diagnostic tests investigating bacterial load and microscopy to evaluate inflammation (polymorphonuclear leucocytes), distinguish U. urealyticum and U. parvum and exclude traditional STIs such as gonorrhoea, chlamydia, M. genitalium and trichomoniasis.…”

“…A recent meta‐analysis and two studies (which did not exclude ‘true’ STIs or BV, and only included M. hominis culture positive samples) have suggested an association of M. hominis with infertility in men. However, M. hominis is strongly associated with several ‘true’ STIs that can cause infertility as well as with BV, which is common in women, and two recent studies indicated that sexual partners share their genital tract microbiome, suggesting that molecular detection in men is likely to reflect the carriage in their female sexual partner .…”

“…Of the five included studies, three were from China where a high prevalence was observed in both cases (19.6%) and controls (8.3%) compared to a study from Jordan 1.1% vs. 2.9% and Iran 9% vs. 1%, respectively. Whether U. urealyticum actually causes male infertility remains unclear, some studies do not differentiate U. urealyticum and U. parvum , further complicating interpretation of the data . Possible explanations for an inconsistent association in case–control studies of male infertility include, failure to differentiate U. urealyticum and U. parvum and association by confounding as U. urealyticum is associated with younger age, recent change in sexual partner and fewer lifetime sexual partners and the association of ureaplasmas with BV …”

“…Whether U. urealyticum actually causes male infertility remains unclear, some studies do not differentiate U. urealyticum and U. parvum, further complicating interpretation of the data. 34,[43][44][45] Possible explanations for an inconsistent association in case-control studies of male infertility include, failure to differentiate U. urealyticum and U. parvum 44,45 and association by confounding as U. urealyticum is associated with younger age, recent change in sexual partner and fewer lifetime sexual partners and the association of ureaplasmas with BV. 4,26,27,39 Women The prevalence of M. hominis, U. urealyticum and U. parvum in non-pregnant sexually active symptomatic and asymptomatic women, measured by molecular tests including species differentiation, has ranged between 3.1-15%, 5.2-20% and 20-89%, respectively.…”

Nanomaterials: Friend or foe to male fertility?

“…Several sexually transmissible diseases have raised major concerns about male infertility in clinical practice [8]. Recently, the effects of nanoparticles on the reproductive system have been noted.…”