The bottom line -- i.e. your main take-home from this test -- is that Ureaplasma parvum is an entirely normal component among the genital microbiome, i.e. the many bacteria that naturally reside in the genital tract. It is not known to cause any symptoms, disease, or health problem. In other words, the U parvum was detected in your test panel is a normal result. You need do nothing about it. For many or most labs, the default "normal" result is "not detected"; this can be the case even for harmless bacteria causing no health problem. 

Now comes one of my occasional blog-like longer replies if you would like more information, perhaps useful in replying to future questions or for other readers who might browse the forum. Thanks for the opportunity.

The question is why so many labs include U. parvum in their STI test panels. The answer is partly just from habit, and the expectations of some (many?) physicians who order such tests. Undoubtedly marketing and profit also are influences: many physicians and patients think they're getting a good deal by inclusing of a whole bunch of sometimes sexually transmissible bacteria and viruses that in fact usually don't matter much or at all.

Until a few years ago, U. parvum was not recognized as a distinct species; it was classified as U. urealyticum. Since then, the two species are now distinguished from one another. However, even U. urealyticum is questionable for inclusion in such panels, because it also can be considered part of the normal genital microbiome. Unlike UP, UU does cause a minority of cases of nongonococcal urethritis (NGU) in men. However, this too usually causes no symptoms and, without symptoms, no treatment is needed. And UU has never been shown to cause symptoms or health problems of any kind in women.

Most "comprehensive" STI testing panels include several tests that, in the opinion of most STI and public health experts, should not be included at all. That includes both Ureaplasma species, Mycoplasma hominis and, for most patients, tests for hepatitis B and C and for the herpes simplex viruses (HSV1 and HSV2). These infections either are too rare to warrant routine testing or, especially for HSV, are poor tests that often give misleading results. The most rational tests for the large majority of dating persons are gonorrhea and chlamydia (by urine or swab from exposed anatomic sites) plus blood tests for HIV and syphilis. All the others are unnecessary and not recommended by most experts for most sexually active persons. In your future routine testing, you might reduce the test cost by selecting only these tests rather than a "comprehensive" STI panel.

All this can be confusing; let me know if anything isn't clear.