The duodenal microbiome is altered in small intestinal bacterial overgrowth.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Bacterial Infections
/ diagnosis
Duodenum
/ microbiology
Endoscopy, Digestive System
Female
Gastrointestinal Microbiome
/ physiology
Gastrointestinal Tract
/ microbiology
Humans
Intestine, Small
/ microbiology
Irritable Bowel Syndrome
/ microbiology
Male
Microbiota
/ genetics
Middle Aged
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
07
11
2019
accepted:
04
06
2020
entrez:
10
7
2020
pubmed:
10
7
2020
medline:
15
9
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) is highly prevalent and is associated with numerous gastrointestinal disorders, but the microbes involved remain poorly defined. Moreover, existing studies of microbiome alterations in SIBO have utilized stool samples, which are not representative of the entire gastrointestinal tract. Therefore, we aimed to determine and compare the duodenal microbiome composition in SIBO and non-SIBO subjects, using duodenal aspirates from subjects undergoing standard-of-care esophagogastroduodenoscopy without colon preparation. Using the recently-redefined cutoff for SIBO of >103 colony forming units per milliliter (CFU/mL), 42 SIBO and 98 non-SIBO subjects were identified. Duodenal samples from SIBO subjects had 4x103-fold higher counts than non-SIBO subjects when plated on MacConkey agar (P<0.0001), and 3.8-fold higher counts when plated on blood agar (P<0.0001). Twenty subjects had also undergone lactulose hydrogen breath tests (LHBTs), of whom 7/20 had SIBO. At the 90-minute timepoint, 4/7 SIBO subjects had positive LHBTs (rise in hydrogen (H2) ≥ 20 ppm above baseline), as compared to 2/13 non-SIBO subjects. 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) sequencing revealed that SIBO subjects had 4.31-fold higher relative abundance of Proteobacteria (FDR P<0.0001) and 1.64-fold lower Firmicutes (P<0.0003) than non-SIBO subjects. This increased relative abundance of Proteobacteria correlated with decreased α-diversity in SIBO subjects (Spearman R = 0.4866, P<0.0001) Specific increases in class Gammaproteobacteria correlated with the area-under-the-curve for H2 for 0-90 mins during LHBT (R = 0.630, P = 0.002). Increases in Gammaproteobacteria resulted primarily from higher relative abundances of the family Enterobacteriaceae (FDR P<0.0001), which correlated with the symptom of bloating (Spearman R = 0.185, 2-tailed P = 0.028). Increases in family Aeromonadaceae correlated with urgency with bowel movement (Spearman R = 0.186, 2-tailed P = 0.028). These results validate the >103 CFU/mL cutoff for the definition of SIBO, and also reveal specific overgrowth of Proteobacteria in SIBO vs. non-SIBO subjects, coupled with an altered Proteobacterial profile that correlates with symptom severity. Future research may elucidate host-microbiome interactions underlying these symptoms in SIBO patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32645011
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234906
pii: PONE-D-19-31090
pmc: PMC7347122
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0234906Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
ScientificWorldJournal. 2012;2012:625023
pubmed: 22701365
BMC Gastroenterol. 2016 Jul 11;16(1):67
pubmed: 27402085
Curr Protoc Hum Genet. 2009 Jul;Chapter 18:Unit 18.2
pubmed: 19582764
Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2012 Mar;28(2):124-9
pubmed: 22241076
Am J Gastroenterol. 2017 May;112(5):775-784
pubmed: 28323273
BMC Microbiol. 2017 Jul 17;17(1):160
pubmed: 28716079
Adv Med Sci. 2007;52:139-42
pubmed: 18217406
Am J Gastroenterol. 2012 Jan;107(1):28-35; quiz 36
pubmed: 22045120
World J Gastroenterol. 2014 Oct 14;20(38):13999-4003
pubmed: 25320539
ISME J. 2016 Jul;10(7):1669-81
pubmed: 26905627
Arch Dermatol Res. 2019 Jan;311(1):1-8
pubmed: 30382339
Dig Dis Sci. 2010 Sep;55(9):2441-9
pubmed: 20467896
Nucleic Acids Res. 2013 Jan 7;41(1):e1
pubmed: 22933715
World J Gastroenterol. 2010 Jun 28;16(24):2978-90
pubmed: 20572300
mSphere. 2019 Mar 13;4(2):
pubmed: 30867328
Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2016 Apr;30(2):145-59
pubmed: 27086882
Trends Biotechnol. 2015 Sep;33(9):496-503
pubmed: 26210164
BMC Microbiol. 2019 Nov 1;19(1):239
pubmed: 31675917
Cell Mol Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;9(1):33-45
pubmed: 31344510
Nature. 2012 Jun 13;486(7402):207-14
pubmed: 22699609
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2020 Apr 09;10:151
pubmed: 32328469
Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2015 Apr;27(4):481-9
pubmed: 25600077
Gastroenterology. 1970 Dec;59(6):921-9
pubmed: 5486278
Nucleic Acids Res. 2014 Jan;42(Database issue):D199-205
pubmed: 24214961
Microbiome. 2017 Mar 3;5(1):27
pubmed: 28253908
Nature. 2012 May 09;486(7402):222-7
pubmed: 22699611
Gut. 2008 Sep;57(9):1334-5; author reply 1335
pubmed: 18719147
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2013 Jun;37(11):1103-11
pubmed: 23574267
Am J Gastroenterol. 2020 Feb;115(2):165-178
pubmed: 32023228
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2009 Mar 30;29 Suppl 1:1-49
pubmed: 19344474
Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2019 Jan 15;21(1):3
pubmed: 30645678
Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2015 Apr;17(4):16
pubmed: 25786900
Gut. 2018 Sep;67(9):1716-1725
pubmed: 29934437
Gut. 2015 Oct;64(10):1553-61
pubmed: 25596182
J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol. 2002 May;4(3):269-76
pubmed: 11931558
Dig Dis Sci. 2011 Jun;56(6):1612-8
pubmed: 21286935
Nature. 2007 Oct 18;449(7164):804-10
pubmed: 17943116
Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2017 Jan;27(1):1-13
pubmed: 27908510
J Clin Pathol. 1980 Jan;33(1):61-5
pubmed: 6987278
Dig Dis Sci. 2008 Jun;53(6):1443-54
pubmed: 17990113
Nat Biotechnol. 2013 Sep;31(9):814-21
pubmed: 23975157
Nucleic Acids Res. 2000 Jan 1;28(1):27-30
pubmed: 10592173
PLoS Comput Biol. 2014 Apr 03;10(4):e1003531
pubmed: 24699258
Genome Biol. 2012 Apr 16;13(9):R79
pubmed: 23013615
J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2016 Jun;25(2):159-65
pubmed: 27308646
Proc Jpn Acad Ser B Phys Biol Sci. 2016;92(9):423-435
pubmed: 27840390
Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:9351507
pubmed: 29230419