Submitted:
12 October 2026
Posted:
13 October 2026
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
(1) Background: Vaginal dysbiosis is strongly implicated in the pathophysiology of vaginitis and bacterial vaginosis (BV). Standard antimicrobial therapy may temporarily reduce pathogen burden but often disrupts beneficial Lactobacillus species, contributing to recurrence. Topical oxygen treatment may promote selective suppression of anaerobic pathogens and restore Lactobacillus-dominated communities. This preliminary study aimed to evaluate the effect of topical oxygen treatment—alone or adjunctive to systemic antimicrobial treatment—on vaginal microbiota composition. (2) Methods: Twenty-two symptomatic women affected by either BV or vulvovaginitis were enrolled and assigned to either topical oxygen or standard antimicrobial treatment plus topical oxygen. Oxygen delivery (3 L/min for 20 minutes, twice weekly for 2 weeks) was performed by using the Caress Flow device. Vaginal microbiota composition, pH and Lactobacillus presence were evaluated at baseline and 10–14 days post-treatment using the 16S Metagenomic Sequencing Library Preparation, sequencing and analysis. (3) Results: Topical oxygen alone increased the negative swabs from 4 (36.4%) to 9 (81.8%), p=0.06 and maintained stably high the total Lactobacillus spp. 92.60% [67.88–96.16%] at baseline and 91.50% [87.4–95.0%] pre-treatment. Oxygen plus antimicrobial treatment markedly reduced strict anaerobes (pre-treatment: 24.8% [15.3-36.5] to 9.0% [1.3-17.4] after treatment, p=0.05) and decreased BV-associated genera including Atopobium and Sneathia. Both oxygen-based regimens showed trends toward restoration or maintenance of Lactobacillus dominance. (4) Conclusions: Topical oxygen treatment favourably modulates the vaginal microbiota and may accelerate recovery from dysbiosis especially when used combined with standard antimicrobial treatment. These findings support larger trials to assess clinical efficacy and recurrence prevention.
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Population
2.2. Study Design
2.4. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Topical Oxygen
3.2. Antibiotic Treatment Plus Topical Oxygen
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ravel, J.; Brotman, R.M. Translating the vaginal microbiome: gaps and opportunities. Microbiome 2016, 4, 23–31. [Google Scholar]
- Boris, S.; Barbés, C. Role played by lactobacilli in controlling the population of vaginal pathogens. Microbes Infect. 2000, 2, 543–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Onderdonk, A.B.; Delaney, M.L.; Fichorova, R.N. The human microbiome during bacterial vaginosis. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2016, 29, 223–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bradshaw, C.S.; Sobel, J.D. Current treatment of bacterial vaginosis—limitations and need for innovation. J. Infect. Dis. 2016, 214 (Suppl 1), S14–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Swidsinski, A.; Verstraelen, H.; Loening-Baucke, V.; et al. Presence of a polymicrobial biofilm in bacterial vaginosis. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e53997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Goldman, L.; Schafer, A.I. (Eds.) Goldman’s Cecil Medicine. (Twenty-Fourth Edition); Elsevier Press, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- André, A.C.; Debande, L.; Marteyn, B.S. The selective advantage of facultative anaerobes relies on their unique ability to cope with changing oxygen levels during infection. Cell Microbiol. 2021, 23(8), e13338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zheng, H.; Brennan, T.; Shetty, A. Oxygen and redox regulation in the vaginal microbiome: implications for dysbiosis. J. Reprod. Immunol. 2021, 148, 103–12. [Google Scholar]
- Eschenbach, D.A. Oxygen tension and redox potential of the vaginal environment: effect on microbial populations. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1989, 160, 1130–5. [Google Scholar]
- Facchinetti, F.; Longo, M.; Danieli, A.; Melis, B.; Garoia, F.; Bergamini, E. Vaginal supplementation of high concentration Oxygen for the treatment of vaginal infections: A pilot, controlled trial. Eur. Gynecol. Obstet. 2024, 7(1), 23–26. [Google Scholar]
- Rossi, M.; D’Andrea, F.; Bianchi, P. Topical oxygen therapy for vaginal dysbiosis: a pilot clinical experience. Gynecol. Obstet. Invest. 2020, 85, 340–6. [Google Scholar]
- Bush, L.M.; Vazquez-Pertejo, M.T. Anaerobic bacteria: overview. MSD Manual Professional Edition, 2025. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fredricks, D.N.; Fiedler, T.L.; Marrazzo, J.M. Molecular identification of bacteria associated with BV. N Engl. J. Med. 2005, 353, 1899–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Muzny, C.A.; Kardas, P.; Griswold, M.E. Role of recurrent dysbiosis in BV pathophysiology. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020, 71, 1109–16. [Google Scholar]
- Müller-Heupt, L.K.; Wiesmann-Imilowski, N.; Schröder, S.; et al. Oxygen-Releasing Hyaluronic Acid-Based Dispersion with Controlled Oxygen Delivery for Enhanced Periodontal Tissue Engineering. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24(6), 5936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

| Pre-treatment (N=11) |
Post-treatment (N=11) |
P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| pH | 4.50 (4.50–4.75) | 4.50 (4.50–4.75) | 1.00 |
| Lactobacilli presence | 6 (54.5%) | 1 (14.3%) | 0.50 |
| Vaginal swab result Negative Leucocytosis Positive |
4 (36.4%) 3 (27.2%) 4 (36.4%) |
9 (81.8%) 1 (9.1%) 1 (9.1%) |
0.06 |
| Bacteria spp, | |||
| Anaerococcus spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.07) | 0.01 (0.00–0.03) | 0.14 |
| Aerococcus spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.37 |
| Atopobium spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.01) | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.12 |
| Bacteroides spp | 0.07 (0.02–0.12) | 0.06 (0.02–0.10) | 0.13 |
| Bifidobacterium spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.02) | 0.00 (0.00–0.01) | 0.81 |
| Clostridium spp | 0.01 (0.00–0.10) | 0.01 (0.00–0.03) | 0.29 |
| Dialister spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.02) | 0.00 (0.00–0.07) | 0.46 |
| Gardnerella spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.04) | 0.00 (0.00–0.04) | 1.00 |
| Megasphera spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.31 |
| Peptoniphulus spp | 0.01 (0.00–0.12) | 0.01 (0.00–0.09) | 0.14 |
| Prevotella spp | 0.01 (0.00–0.30) | 0.13 (0.01–0.27) | 0.44 |
| Sneathia spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.25 |
| Staphylococcus spp | 0.01 (0.00–0.16) | 0.02 (0.00–0.10) | 0.44 |
| Streptococcus spp | 0.14 (0.02–0.50) | 0.07 (0.04–0.13) | 0.37 |
| Ureaplasma spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.01) | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 1.00 |
| Pre-treatment (N=11) |
Post-treatment (N=11) |
P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| pH | 5.00 (4.88–5.13) | 4.75 (4.50–5.00) | 0.18 |
| Lactobacilli presence | 5 (45.4%) | 6 (54.5%) | 0.37 |
| Vaginal swab result Negative Leucocytosis Positive |
4 (36.4%) 4 (36.4%) 3 (27.2%) |
8 (72.3%) 3 (27.2%)0 |
0.12 |
| Bacteria spp, | |||
| Actinomyces spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.00 (0.00–0.07) | 0.07 |
| Aerococcus spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.12) | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.56 |
| Atopobium spp | 0.00 (0.00–2.37) | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.01 |
| Bacteroides spp | 0.11 (0.06–0.13) | 0.10 (0.03–0.14) | 0.46 |
| Bifidobacterium spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.30) | 0.00 (0.00–0.02) | 0.29 |
| Clostridium spp | 0.04 (0.02–3.43) | 0.02 (0.01–0.16) | 0.06 |
| Dialister spp | 0.01 (0.00–0.78) | 0.00 (0.00–0.01) | 0.12 |
| Gardnerella spp | 0.01 (0.00–3.86) | 0.00 (0.00–3.18) | 0.84 |
| Megasphera spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.92) | 0.00 (0.00–0.01) | 0.13 |
| Peptoniphulus spp | 0.01 (0.00–0.23) | 0.01 (0.00–0.02) | 0.46 |
| Prevotella spp | 0.45 (0.05–8.75) | 0.06 (0.02–0.35) | 0.83 |
| Sneathia spp | 0.00 (0.00–26.41) | 0.00 (0.00–0.00) | 0.04 |
| Staphylococcus spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.01) | 0.02 (0.01–0.09) | 0.03 |
| Streptococcus spp | 0.02 (0.00–0.03) | 0.71 (0.14–2.83) | 0.002 |
| Ureaplasma spp | 0.00 (0.00–0.01) | 0.00 (0.00–0.14) | 1.00 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).