Intravaginal probiotics before embryo transfer do not improve pregnancy rates in recurrent implantation failure cases: An RCT.

OA: gold CC-BY-NC-4.0

Abstract

BackgroundConsidering the considerable influence of the vaginal microbiome on endometrial receptivity and embryo implantation, we hypothesized that cases of recurrent implantation failure (RIF) might benefit from the intravaginal probiotic administration.ObjectiveEvaluation of the effects of intravaginal probiotic administration before frozen embryo transfer (FET) on the rates of pregnancy and the status of vaginal lactobacillary flora in cases of RIF.Materials and methodsThis was a randomized, parallel-group, clinical trial conducted at an infertility clinic in Tehran, Iran between January 2021 and September 2022. A total of 166 reproductive-aged women with a history of unexplained RIF were randomly assigned to either the probiotic group or the control group (n = 83/each group). The probiotic group received intravaginal probiotics (LactoVagⓇ) daily for 2 wk from the second day of the menstrual cycle along with the routine treatment of FET. The control group received only the routine treatment of FET. The primary outcome was the chemical pregnancy rate, and the secondary outcomes were the clinical pregnancy rate and the status of vaginal lactobacillary flora.ResultsA total of 163 participants were included in the final analysis. The probiotic group had a slightly higher chemical pregnancy rate than the control group (39.02% vs. 33.33%), but the difference was not statistically significant (risk ratio: 1.71, 95% CI: 0.77-1.76; p = 0.449). The clinical pregnancy rate was also non-significantly higher in the probiotic group than the control group (37.80% vs. 33.33%; RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.76-1.74; p = 0.623).ConclusionIntravaginal probiotic administration did not significantly improve the pregnancy rates in RIF cases undergoing FET. Further studies are needed to explore the optimal dose, duration, and timing of probiotic administration, as well as the mechanisms of action and the potential adverse effects of probiotics on the vaginal microbiome and the implantation process.
Full text 25,420 characters · extracted from pmc-nxml · 2 sections · click to expand

Section

All authors contributed to the study conceptualization and commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Detailed contribution statement: MNJ: Study design, supervision, data collection, study methodology, and interpretation of results; FH: Data collection, interpretation of results, and manuscript editing; MM: Data collection and manuscript review; MA: Data analyses and manuscript original draft preparation; SZ: Data collection and manuscript editing.

Coi Statement

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: pmc-nxml

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2024) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-08-16T09:21:09.727480+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-21T05:10:58.409756+00:00
License: CC-BY-NC-4.0