The impact of microbiome in urological diseases: a systematic review
The term microbiome is used to signify the ecological community of commensal, symbiotic, and pathogenic microorganisms that share our body space, in which there were increasing evidences to suggest that they might have potential roles in various medical conditions. While the study of microbiome in the urinary system is not as robust as the systems included in the Human Microbiome Project, there are still evidences in the literature showing that microbiome may have a role in urological diseases. Therefore, we would like to perform a systematic review on the topic and summarize the available evidence on the impact of microbiome on urological diseases.
This review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. After screening 589 abstracts and including additional studies (such as references from review papers), 76 studies were included for review and discussion.
Studies had suggested that there were correlations of microbiome of different body cavities (e.g., fecal, urinary and seminal fluid) with urological diseases. Also, different diseases would have different microbiome profile in different body cavities. Unfortunately, the studies on the association of microbiome and urological diseases were still either weak or inconsistent.
Studies suggested that there might be some relationship between microbiome and various urological diseases. However, further large-scale studies with control of confounding factors should be performed under a standardized methodology in order to have better understanding of the relationship. Also, more standardized reporting protocol for microbiome studies should be considered for better communications in future studies.
KeywordsMicrobiota Urology Prostate cancer Urolithiasis Lower urinary tract symptom
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest related to this manuscript.
Human and animal rights statement
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- 1.Savage DC (1977) Microbial ecology of the gastrointestinal tract. Annu Rev Microbiol 31(1):107–133. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.mi.31.100177.000543 Google Scholar
- 2.Lederberg J, McCray A (2001) ’Ome Sweet’Omics—a genealogical treasury of words. Scientist 15:8Google Scholar
- 9.Fouts DE, Pieper R, Szpakowski S et al (2012) Integrated next-generation sequencing of 16S rDNA and metaproteomics differentiate the healthy urine microbiome from asymptomatic bacteriuria in neuropathic bladder associated with spinal cord injury. J Transl Med 10(1):174. https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5876-10-174 Google Scholar
- 25.Xu W, Yang L, Lee P et al (2014) Mini-review: perspective of the microbiome in the pathogenesis of urothelial carcinoma. Am J Clin Exp Urol 2(1):57–61Google Scholar
- 33.Gutierrez Millet V, Praga M, Miranda B et al (1985) Ureolytic Citrobacter freundii infection of the urine as a cause of dissolution of cystine renal calculi. J Urol 133(3):443–446Google Scholar
- 37.Allison MJ, Dawson KA, Mayberry WR, Foss JG (1985) Oxalobacter formigenes gen. nov., sp. nov.: oxalate-degrading anaerobes that inhabit the gastrointestinal tract. Arch Microbiol 141(1):1–7Google Scholar
- 42.McDonald M, Kameh D, Johnson ME, Johansen TEB, Albala D, Mouraviev V (2017) A head-to-head comparative Phase II study of standard urine culture and sensitivity versus DNA next-generation sequencing testing for urinary tract infections. Rev Urol 19(4):213–220. https://doi.org/10.3909/riu0780 Google Scholar
- 43.Mouraviev V, McDonald M (2018) An implementation of next generation sequencing for prevention and diagnosis of urinary tract infection in urology. Can J Urol 25(3):9349–9356Google Scholar
- 45.Darouiche RO, Thornby JI, Cerra-Stewart C, Donovan WH, Hull RA (2005) Bacterial interference for prevention of urinary tract infection: a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind pilot trial. Clin Infect Dis Off Publ Infect Dis Soc Am 41(10):1531–1534. https://doi.org/10.1086/497272 Google Scholar
- 49.Tariq R, Pardi DS, Tosh PK, Walker RC, Razonable RR, Khanna S (2017) Fecal microbiota transplantation for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection reduces recurrent urinary tract infection frequency. Clin Infect Dis Off Publ Infect Dis Soc Am 65(10):1745–1747. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cix618 Google Scholar
- 59.Shoskes DA, Altemus J, Polackwich AS, Tucky B, Wang H, Eng C (2016) The urinary microbiome differs significantly between patients with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome and controls as well as between patients with different clinical phenotypes. Urology 92:26–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2016.02.043 Google Scholar
- 72.Jarvi K, Lacroix JM, Jain A, Dumitru I, Heritz D, Mittelman MW (1996) Polymerase chain reaction-based detection of bacteria in semen. Fertil Steril 66(3):463–467Google Scholar