Table 5. Summary of vaginal microbiota characterization studies in pregnant women (including this study).
| N° | Population description | Study group (n) | Place | Methodology | pH (mean) | Bacterial species detected (%) | Author | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lactobacillus sp. | L. iners | L. crispatus | L. acidophilus | L. jensenii | L. gasseri | G. vaginalis | A. vaginae | M. mulieris | Other Lactobacillus sp. | |||||||
| 1 | Pregnant women (Age range 18–35) | 126 | Austria | Multiplex PCR by Culture | Nd | 57.1 | Nd | 19.8 | Nd | 11.9 | Nd | Nd | Nd | Nd | YES | Kiss et al. (2007) |
| 2 | Pregnant women (Age range Nd) | 100 | Belgium | tRFLP—PCR | Nd | X | 40.3 | 23.4 | Nd | 3.9 | 40.3 | Nd | Nd | Nd | NO | Verstraelen et al. (2009) |
| 3 | Pregnant and non-pregnant women (Age range 19.4–39.2) | 34 | China | PCR and 16 sregion sequencing | 4.5 | X | 55 | 26.9 | Nd | Nd | 6.3 | 11.8 | 11.8 | Nd | NO | Huang et al. (2014) |
| 4 | Pregnant teenagers (Age range 12–19) | 95 | Ecuador | PCR Electrophoresis gel |
5.2 | 100 | 89.5 | 92.6 | 87,4 | 48.4 | 56.8 | 93.7 | 100 | 34.7 | NO | This study (2018) |
| 5 | Pregnant women (Age range 19–44) | 132 | Japan | PCR Culture |
Nd | 98.5 | 41.7 | 51.5 | Nd | 25 | 31.8 | Nd | Nd | Nd | NO | Tamrakar et al. (2007) |
| 6 | Pregnant women (Age range 13–43) | 140 | Mexico | PCR (DGGE) | Nd | 98.4 | 56.7 | Nd | 78.1 | Nd | 20.3 | Nd | Nd | 2.0 | YES | Hernández-Rodríguez et al. (2011) |
| 7 | Pregnant and non-pregnant women (Age range 18–55) | 131 | Rwanda | 16s region pyrosequencing | 4.6 | X | X | X | Nd | X | X | X | X | Nd | NO | McMillan et al. (2015) |
| 8 | Pregnant women (Age range Nd) | 42 | United Kingdom | 16s region pyrosequencing | Nd | X | 30a | 43a | Nd | 14a | 9a | Nd | 2a | Nd | YES | MacIntyre et al. (2015) |
| 9 | Pregnant women (Age range 28–31) | 293 | United Kingdom | Culture MALDI-TOF |
Nd | 75 | Nd | 37 | Nd | 45 | 34 | Nd | Nd | Nd | YES | Husain et al. (2014) |
| 10 | Pregnant and non-pregnant women (Age range Nd) | 54 | USA | 16s region pyrosequencing | Nd | X | 58.5a | 38.1a | Nd | X | 4.3a | 2.2a | 2.2a | Nd | YES | Romero et al. (2014) |
| 11 | Pregnant and non-pregnant women (Age mean 31.4) | 84 | USA | 16s region pyrosequencing | Nd | X | X | X | Nd | X | Nd | Nd | Nd | Nd | YES | Aagaard et al. (2012) |
| 12 | Pregnant women (Age ≥18) | 88 | USA | PCR Sanger sequencing |
Nd | X | 76.9 African 21.7 Asian 23.1 Caucasian 68.4 Hispanic |
30.8 African 41.5 Caucasian 15.8 Hispanic |
21.7 Asian 1.5 Caucasian |
7.7 African 27.7 Caucasian 31.6 Hispanic |
7.7 African 17.4 Asian 41.5 Caucasian 10.5 Hispanic |
Nd | X | Nd | YES | Hyman et al. (2014) |
| 13 | Pregnant women (Age mean 24) | 50 | USA | qPCR | Nd | Nd | Nd | X | Nd | Nd | Nd | 66.7 | Nd | Nd | NO | Nelson et al. (2009) |
| 14 | Pregnant women (Age range 21–33) | 9 | Venezuela | PCR yrosequencing |
Nd | 88–94 | Nd | Nd | Nd | Nd | Nd | 0.1–2 | 4–34 | Nd | NO | Dominguez-Bello et al. (2010) |
Notes.
Legend: X, species analyzed but no percentage reported; Nd, Not detected.
a
Results only from pregnant women/state.