Download PDF
Semin Reprod Med 2023; 41(05): 200-208
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1778661
Review Article

Microenvironment of the Lower Reproductive Tract: Focus on the Cervical Mucus Plug

Susana Ruiz-Durán
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, Granada, Spain
2   Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria ibs.GRANADA, Granada, Spain
,
Celia M. Tenorio
3   Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
,
Irene Vico-Zúñiga
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, Granada, Spain
,
Sebastián Manzanares
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, Granada, Spain
,
Alberto Puertas-Prieto
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital, Granada, Spain
2   Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria ibs.GRANADA, Granada, Spain
,
Signe Altmäe
2   Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria ibs.GRANADA, Granada, Spain
3   Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
4   Division of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
,
Eva Vargas 
2   Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria ibs.GRANADA, Granada, Spain
3   Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain
5   Department of Experimental Biology, Faculty of Experimental Sciences, University of Jaén, Jaén, Spain
› Author Affiliations Funding This study is supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness (MINECO) and European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and ERFP “A way of making Europe” projects Endo-Map PID2021-127280OB-I00 and ROSY CNS2022-135999; and the Margarita Salas program for the Requalification of the Spanish University system (UJAR01MS).
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The female lower reproductive tract microbiota is a complex ecosystem comprising various microorganisms that play a pivotal role in maintaining women's reproductive well-being. During pregnancy, the vaginal microbiota undergoes dynamic changes that are important for a successful gestation. This review summarizes the implications of the cervical mucus plug microenvironment and its profound impact on reproductive health. Further, the symbiotic relationship between the vaginal microbiome and the cervical mucus plug is highlighted, with a special emphasis on how this natural barrier serves as a guardian against ascending infections. Understanding this complex host–microbes interplay could pave the way for innovative approaches to improve women's reproductive health and fertility.

Keywords

cervical mucus plug - microbiota - microbiome - pregnancy - preterm birth


Publication History

Article published online:
23 January 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Koedooder R, Maghdid DM, Beckers NGM, Schoenmakers S, Kok DJ, Laven JSE. Dynamics of the urinary microbiome in pregnancy and the coincidental predictive value of the microbiota for IVF/IVF-ICSI outcome. Reprod Biomed Online 2021; 43 (05) 871-879
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Chen YC, Greenbaum J, Shen H, Deng HW. Association between gut microbiota and bone health: potential mechanisms and prospective. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2017; 102 (10) 3635-3646
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Rowland I, Gibson G, Heinken A. et al. Gut microbiota functions: metabolism of nutrients and other food components. Eur J Nutr 2018; 57 (01) 1-24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bull MJ, Plummer NT. Part 1: The human gut microbiome in health and disease. Integr Med (Encinitas) 2014; 13 (06) 17-22
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Hou K, Wu ZX, Chen XY. et al. Microbiota in health and diseases. Signal Transduct Target Ther 2022; 7 (01) 135
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Swidsinski S, Moll WM, Swidsinski A. Bacterial vaginosis-vaginal polymicrobial biofilms and dysbiosis. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2023; 120 (20) 347-354
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Younes JA, Lievens E, Hummelen R, van der Westen R, Reid G, Petrova MI. Women and their microbes: the unexpected friendship. Trends Microbiol 2018; 26 (01) 16-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Altmäe S, Franasiak JM, Mändar R. The seminal microbiome in health and disease. Nat Rev Urol 2019; 16 (12) 703-721
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Molina NM, Sola-Leyva A, Saez-Lara MJ. et al. New opportunities for endometrial health by modifying uterine microbial composition: present or future?. Biomolecules 2020; 10 (04) 593
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Al-Nasiry S, Ambrosino E, Schlaepfer M. et al. The interplay between reproductive tract microbiota and immunological system in human reproduction. Front Immunol 2020; 11: 378
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Molina NM, Sola-Leyva A, Haahr T. et al. Analysing endometrial microbiome: methodological considerations and recommendations for good practice. Hum Reprod 2021; 36 (04) 859-879
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Sirota I, Zarek SM, Segars JH. Potential influence of the microbiome on infertility and assisted reproductive technology. Semin Reprod Med 2014; 32 (01) 35-42
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Power ML, Quaglieri C, Schulkin J. Reproductive microbiomes: a new thread in the microbial network. Reprod Sci 2017; 24 (11) 1482-1492
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Zakaria ZZ, Al-Rumaihi S, Al-Absi RS. et al. Physiological changes and interactions between microbiome and the host during pregnancy. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2022; 12: 824925
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Di Simone N, Santamaria Ortiz A, Specchia M. et al. Recent insights on the maternal microbiota: impact on pregnancy outcomes. Front Immunol 2020; 11: 528202 Accessed November52023
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Siena M, Laterza L, Matteo MV. et al. Gut and reproductive tract microbiota adaptation during pregnancy: new insights for pregnancy-related complications and therapy. Microorganisms 2021; 9 (03) 473
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Venneri MA, Franceschini E, Sciarra F, Rosato E, D'Ettorre G, Lenzi A. Human genital tracts microbiota: dysbiosis crucial for infertility. J Endocrinol Invest 2022; 45 (06) 1151-1160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Romero R. Prenatal medicine: the child is the father of the man. 1996. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2009; 22 (08) 636-639
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Lacroix G, Gouyer V, Gottrand F, Desseyn JL. The cervicovaginal mucus barrier. Int J Mol Sci 2020; 21 (21) 8266
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Silvano A, Meriggi N, Renzi S. et al. Vaginal microbiome in pregnant women with and without short cervix. Nutrients 2023; 15 (09) 2173
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Parraga-Leo A, Oskotsky TT, Oskotsky B. et al. VMAP: vaginal microbiome atlas during pregnancy. medRxiv. Published online April 5, 2023:2023.03.21.23286947 DOI: 10.1101/2023.03.21.23286947
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Zheng N, Guo R, Wang J, Zhou W, Ling Z. Contribution of Lactobacillus iners to vaginal health and diseases: a systematic review. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2021; 11: 792787
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Chee WJY, Chew SY, Than LTL. Vaginal microbiota and the potential of Lactobacillus derivatives in maintaining vaginal health. Microb Cell Fact 2020; 19 (01) 203
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Punzón-Jiménez P, Labarta E. The impact of the female genital tract microbiome in women health and reproduction: a review. J Assist Reprod Genet 2021; 38 (10) 2519-2541
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Mall AS, Habte H, Mthembu Y, Peacocke J, de Beer C. Mucus and Mucins: do they have a role in the inhibition of the human immunodeficiency virus?. Virol J 2017; 14 (01) 192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Kindinger LM, MacIntyre DA, Lee YS. et al. Relationship between vaginal microbial dysbiosis, inflammation, and pregnancy outcomes in cervical cerclage. Sci Transl Med 2016; 8 (350) 350ra102
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Lykke MR, Becher N, Haahr T, Boedtkjer E, Jensen JS, Uldbjerg N. Vaginal, cervical and uterine ph in women with normal and abnormal vaginal microbiota. Pathogens 2021; 10 (02) 90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Wessels JM, Felker AM, Dupont HA, Kaushic C. The relationship between sex hormones, the vaginal microbiome and immunity in HIV-1 susceptibility in women. Dis Model Mech 2018; 11 (09) dmm035147
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Holzman C, Leventhal JM, Qiu H, Jones NM, Wang J. BV Study Group. Factors linked to bacterial vaginosis in nonpregnant women. Am J Public Health 2001; 91 (10) 1664-1670
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Park S, Moon J, Kang N. et al. Predicting preterm birth through vaginal microbiota, cervical length, and WBC using a machine learning model. Front Microbiol 2022; 13: 912853
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Vornhagen J, Quach P, Santana-Ufret V. et al. Human cervical mucus plugs exhibit insufficiencies in antimicrobial activity towards group B Streptococcus. J Infect Dis 2018; 217 (10) 1626-1636
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Taherali F, Varum F, Basit AW. A slippery slope: on the origin, role and physiology of mucus. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2018; 124: 16-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Hansen LK, Becher N, Bastholm S. et al. The cervical mucus plug inhibits, but does not block, the passage of ascending bacteria from the vagina during pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2014; 93 (01) 102-108
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Katz DF. Human cervical mucus: research update. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991; 165 (6, Pt 2): 1984-1986
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Altmäe S. Commentary: uterine microbiota: residents, tourists, or invaders?. Front Immunol 2018; 9: 1874
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Vagios S, Mitchell CM. Mutual preservation: a review of interactions between cervicovaginal mucus and microbiota. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2021; 11: 676114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Chen C, Song X, Wei W. et al. The microbiota continuum along the female reproductive tract and its relation to uterine-related diseases. Nat Commun 2017; 8 (01) 875
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Winters AD, Romero R, Gervasi MT. et al. Does the endometrial cavity have a molecular microbial signature?. Sci Rep 2019; 9 (01) 9905
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Tsai HW, Tsui KH, Chiu YC, Wang LC. Adverse effect of lactobacilli-depauperate cervicovaginal microbiota on pregnancy outcomes in women undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer. Reprod Med Biol 2023; 22 (01) e12495
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Hua X, Xu L, Li Q. et al. Deep grouping analysis of the altered cervical canal microbiota in intrauterine adhesion patients. Reprod Sci 2022; 29 (12) 3494-3507
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Chang CYY, Chiang AJ, Lai MT. et al. A more diverse cervical microbiome associates with better clinical outcomes in patients with endometriosis: a pilot study. Biomedicines 2022; 10 (01) 174
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Akiyama K, Nishioka K, Khan KN. et al. Molecular detection of microbial colonization in cervical mucus of women with and without endometriosis. Am J Reprod Immunol 2019; 82 (02) e13147
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Becher N, Adams Waldorf K, Hein M, Uldbjerg N. The cervical mucus plug: structured review of the literature. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2009; 88 (05) 502-513
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Smith-Dupont KB, Wagner CE, Witten J. et al. Probing the potential of mucus permeability to signify preterm birth risk. Sci Rep 2017; 7 (01) 10302
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Hein M, Petersen AC, Helmig RB, Uldbjerg N, Reinholdt J. Immunoglobulin levels and phagocytes in the cervical mucus plug at term of pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2005; 84 (08) 734-742
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Shen L, Wang W, Hou W. et al. The function and mechanism of action of uterine microecology in pregnancy immunity and its complications. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2023; 12: 1025714
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Noori M, Helmig RB, Hein M, Steer PJ. Could a cervical occlusion suture be effective at improving perinatal outcome?. BJOG 2007; 114 (05) 532-536
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Lithgow KV, Buchholz VCH, Ku E, Konschuh S, D'Aubeterre A, Sycuro LK. Protease activities of vaginal Porphyromonas species disrupt coagulation and extracellular matrix in the cervicovaginal niche. NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes 2022; 8 (01) 8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Hein M, Helmig RB, Schønheyder HC, Ganz T, Uldbjerg N. An in vitro study of antibacterial properties of the cervical mucus plug in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 185 (03) 586-592
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Hein M, Valore EV, Helmig RB, Uldbjerg N, Ganz T. Antimicrobial factors in the cervical mucus plug. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 187 (01) 137-144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Brunham RC, Paavonen J. Reproductive system infections in women: upper genital tract, fetal, neonatal and infant syndromes. Pathog Dis 2020; 78 (05) ftaa023
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Vargas M, Yañez F, Elias A. et al. Cervical pessary and cerclage placement for preterm birth prevention and cervicovaginal microbiome changes. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2022; 101 (12) 1403-1413
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Becher N, Hein M, Danielsen CC, Uldbjerg N. Matrix metalloproteinases in the cervical mucus plug in relation to gestational age, plug compartment, and preterm labor. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2010; 8: 113
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Gerson KD, Anton L, Ferguson B, Ravel J, Burris HH, Elovitz MA. Gardnerella vaginalis induces matrix metalloproteinases in the cervicovaginal epithelium through TLR-2 activation. J Reprod Immunol 2022; 152: 103648
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Anton L, Ferguson B, Friedman ES, Gerson KD, Brown AG, Elovitz MA. Gardnerella vaginalis alters cervicovaginal epithelial cell function through microbe-specific immune responses. Microbiome 2022; 10 (01) 119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Wang C, Feng Y, Zhou WJ. et al. Screening and identification of endometrial proteins as novel potential biomarkers for repeated implantation failure. PeerJ 2021; 9: e11009
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Dube R, Kar SS. Genital microbiota and outcome of assisted reproductive treatment - a systematic review. Life (Basel) 2022; 12 (11) 1867
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Karaer A, Doğan B, Günal S. et al. The vaginal microbiota composition of women undergoing assisted reproduction: a prospective cohort study. BJOG 2021; 128 (13) 2101-2109
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Moreno I, Codoñer FM, Vilella F. et al. Evidence that the endometrial microbiota has an effect on implantation success or failure. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016; 215 (06) 684-703
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Vitale SG, Ferrari F, Ciebiera M. et al. The role of genital tract microbiome in fertility: a systematic review. Int J Mol Sci 2021; 23 (01) 180
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Moreno I, Garcia-Grau I, Perez-Villaroya D. et al. Endometrial microbiota composition is associated with reproductive outcome in infertile patients. Microbiome 2022; 10 (01) DOI: 10.1186/s40168-021-01184-w.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Hao X, Li P, Wu S, Tan J. Association of the Cervical Microbiota With Pregnancy Outcome in a Subfertile Population Undergoing In Vitro Fertilization: A Case-Control Study. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2021; 11: 654202
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Altmäe S, Rienzi L. Endometrial microbiome: new hope, or hype?. Reprod Biomed Online 2021; 42 (06) 1051-1052
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Sola-Leyva A, Andrés-León E, Molina NM. et al. Mapping the entire functionally active endometrial microbiota. Hum Reprod 2021; 36 (04) 1021-1031
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Canha-Gouveia A, Pérez-Prieto I, Rodríguez CM. et al. The female upper reproductive tract harbors endogenous microbial profiles. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2023; 14: 1096050
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Youssef A, Lashley L, Dieben S, Verburg H, van der Hoorn ML. Defining recurrent pregnancy loss: associated factors and prognosis in couples with two versus three or more pregnancy losses. Reprod Biomed Online 2020; 41 (04) 679-685
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Shi Y, Yamada H, Sasagawa Y, Tanimura K, Deguchi M. Uterine endometrium microbiota and pregnancy outcome in women with recurrent pregnancy loss. J Reprod Immunol 2022; 152: 103653
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Mori R, Hayakawa T, Hirayama M. et al. Cervicovaginal microbiome in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss. J Reprod Immunol 2023; 157: 103944
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Liu FT, Yang S, Yang Z. et al. An altered microbiota in the lower and upper female reproductive tract of women with recurrent spontaneous abortion. Microbiol Spectr 2022; 10 (03) e0046222
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Guang Y, Shen X, Tan Y. et al. Systematic analysis of microbiota in pregnant Chinese women and its association with miscarriage. Ann Transl Med 2022; 10 (20) 1099
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar