Human papillomavirus infection in couples undergoing in vitro fertilization procedures: impact on reproductive outcomes

Effect of human papilloma virus infection onin‐vitrofertilization outcome: systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…Concerning the secondary outcomes of the study, there was no evidence of a difference when comparing HPV+ women with HPV-women regarding clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.06 (95% CI, 0.74-1.54); eight studies, 1173 participants; I 2 = 61%, very low-quality evidence) 6,7,[19][20][21][22][23][24] , positive pregnancy test (RR, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.62-1.30); six studies, 1464 participants; I 2 = 57%, very low-quality evidence) 7,[19][20][21]24,26 and ectopic pregnancy rate (RR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.12-2.48); two studies, 148 participants; I 2 = 0%, very low-quality evidence) 21,24 (Tables 1, 2 and Figure 2). There were no data available to perform an analysis for the other outcomes preset for this review.…”

“…Concerning the primary outcomes of the study, there was no evidence of a difference when comparing HPV-positive (HPV+) women with HPV-negative (HPV-) women regarding live birth or ongoing pregnancy (RR, 1.16 (95% CI, 0.88-1.53); six studies, 983 participants; I 2 = 0%, very low-quality evidence) 6,[20][21][22][23][24] and rate of miscarriage per clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.58 (95% CI, 0.93-2.69); six studies, 290 participants; I 2 = 8%, very low-quality evidence) 6,[20][21][22][23][24] (Tables 1, 2 and Figure 2). Concerning the secondary outcomes of the study, there was no evidence of a difference when comparing HPV+ women with HPV-women regarding clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.06 (95% CI, 0.74-1.54); eight studies, 1173 participants; I 2 = 61%, very low-quality evidence) 6,7,[19][20][21][22][23][24] , positive pregnancy test (RR, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.62-1.30); six studies, 1464 participants; I 2 = 57%, very low-quality evidence) 7,[19][20][21]24,26 and ectopic pregnancy rate (RR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.12-2.48); two studies, 148 participants; I 2 = 0%, very low-quality evidence) 21,24 (Tables 1, 2 and Figure 2).…”

“…After the removal of 10 records as duplicates and screening of 92 through their abstracts, 38 studies were identified as possibly eligible for inclusion and retrieved as full texts. Of these, 24 studies were excluded (Table S1), two studies were ongoing 15,16 , two of those eligible were not used in the meta-analysis owing to a lack of data of interest 17,18 and 10 that met the qualitative and quantitative criteria for inclusion in our meta-analysis were selected 6,7,[19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] (Figure 1).…”

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection: a Mozambique overview

“…Some authors demonstrated that artificially HPV infected sperm are able to enter the oocyte, deliver HPV genome, and that viral genes are then actively transcribed by the penetrated oocyte [34]. Again, a stage-specific maturation arrest in HPV artificially infected embryos has been previously reported [41] and infected couples undergoing assisted reproduction techniques (ART) cycles experienced an increased risk of pregnancy loss compared to non-infected ones [65]. Although this topic is not of vital importance, it must be taken into consideration in developing countries, especially when it is associated with other widespread conditions such as STD or immunodeficiencies.…”

“…Moreover, in vitro evidences show that when HPV is bound to spermatozoa it is potentially transferred to fertilized oocytes, blastocysts, and trophoblast cells [40,9,42]. Even if different studies failed to identify a relationship between early miscarriage/ART failure and HPV positivity in women, new evidences reported a possible role of HPV sperm detection in adverse pregnancy outcome and ART failure [65]. To data, the biological mechanisms by which HPV infection affects sperm fertilization ability is not clear but, it is increasingly clear the role of this infection even in male infertility.…”