系统性综述:基于细菌物种或菌群的 16S rRNA 基因的 GA-Map 菌群失调测试分析肠易激综合征患者的粪便细菌谱。

IF 2.5 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2024-04-17 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/CEG.S451675
Erica Sande Teige, Urd Sortvik, Gülen Arslan Lied
{"title":"系统性综述:基于细菌物种或菌群的 16S rRNA 基因的 GA-Map 菌群失调测试分析肠易激综合征患者的粪便细菌谱。","authors":"Erica Sande Teige, Urd Sortvik, Gülen Arslan Lied","doi":"10.2147/CEG.S451675","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is based on symptom-based criteria due to lack of reliable disease-specific biomarkers. Gut microbiota is perturbed in IBS and when comparing different methods used to analyze gut microbiota, the results might be obscured. Therefore, in this systematic review we aimed to investigate the profile of fecal bacterial markers and dysbiosis index (DI) in patients with IBS and IBS subgroups compared to healthy controls (HCs) conducted by the same method (GA-map Dysbiosis Test based on16S rRNA sequencing).</p><p><strong>Material and method: </strong>We searched PubMed, EMBASE (Ovid) and Cochrane Library for case-control studies comparing fecal gut microbiota analyzed with the GA-map<sup>®</sup> Dysbiosis Test (Oslo, Norway) in patients with IBS and HCs. Our outcomes were the difference in fecal bacterial markers and DI in patients with IBS and IBS subgroups compared to HCs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search identified 28 citations; five articles were included. Most studies evaluated fecal bacterial markers and DI in patients with diarrhea-predominant IBS (IBS-D). Results of fecal bacteria profile in IBS and IBS subgroups compared to HCs are inconsistent, however, two studies showed increased levels of <i>Ruminococcus gnavus</i> in IBS-D compared to HCs and results of DI indicated IBS and IBS subgroups (especially IBS-D) having higher DI compared to HCs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This systematic review revealed inconsistent findings in respect to differences in bacterial markers between IBS and IBS subgroups with HCs in studies using the GA-map Dysbiosis Test based on 16S rRNA sequencing. However, the test is quite novel, and few studies have used the method so far. More research comparing fecal microbiota profile differences in IBS and IBS subgroups compared to HCs utilizing the same method of analysis is needed to give us further insight into the gut bacteria profile in IBS and the clinical consequences of intestinal dysbiosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":10208,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology","volume":"17 ","pages":"109-120"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11032674/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Systematic Review: Fecal Bacterial Profile in Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome Analyzed with the GA-Map Dysbiosis Test Based on the 16S rRNA Gene of Bacterial Species or Groups.\",\"authors\":\"Erica Sande Teige, Urd Sortvik, Gülen Arslan Lied\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/CEG.S451675\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is based on symptom-based criteria due to lack of reliable disease-specific biomarkers. Gut microbiota is perturbed in IBS and when comparing different methods used to analyze gut microbiota, the results might be obscured. Therefore, in this systematic review we aimed to investigate the profile of fecal bacterial markers and dysbiosis index (DI) in patients with IBS and IBS subgroups compared to healthy controls (HCs) conducted by the same method (GA-map Dysbiosis Test based on16S rRNA sequencing).</p><p><strong>Material and method: </strong>We searched PubMed, EMBASE (Ovid) and Cochrane Library for case-control studies comparing fecal gut microbiota analyzed with the GA-map<sup>®</sup> Dysbiosis Test (Oslo, Norway) in patients with IBS and HCs. Our outcomes were the difference in fecal bacterial markers and DI in patients with IBS and IBS subgroups compared to HCs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search identified 28 citations; five articles were included. Most studies evaluated fecal bacterial markers and DI in patients with diarrhea-predominant IBS (IBS-D). Results of fecal bacteria profile in IBS and IBS subgroups compared to HCs are inconsistent, however, two studies showed increased levels of <i>Ruminococcus gnavus</i> in IBS-D compared to HCs and results of DI indicated IBS and IBS subgroups (especially IBS-D) having higher DI compared to HCs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This systematic review revealed inconsistent findings in respect to differences in bacterial markers between IBS and IBS subgroups with HCs in studies using the GA-map Dysbiosis Test based on 16S rRNA sequencing. However, the test is quite novel, and few studies have used the method so far. More research comparing fecal microbiota profile differences in IBS and IBS subgroups compared to HCs utilizing the same method of analysis is needed to give us further insight into the gut bacteria profile in IBS and the clinical consequences of intestinal dysbiosis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10208,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology\",\"volume\":\"17 \",\"pages\":\"109-120\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11032674/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/CEG.S451675\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/CEG.S451675","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:由于缺乏可靠的疾病特异性生物标志物,肠易激综合征(IBS)的诊断以症状为标准。肠易激综合征患者的肠道微生物群受到干扰,在比较用于分析肠道微生物群的不同方法时,结果可能会模糊不清。因此,在这篇系统性综述中,我们旨在通过相同的方法(基于16S rRNA测序的GA-map菌群失调测试),研究肠易激综合征患者和肠易激综合征亚组与健康对照组(HCs)相比,其粪便细菌标记物和菌群失调指数(DI)的概况:我们检索了 PubMed、EMBASE (Ovid) 和 Cochrane 图书馆的病例对照研究,比较了用 GA-map® Dysbiosis Test(挪威奥斯陆)分析的肠易激综合征患者和健康对照者的粪便肠道微生物群。我们的研究结果是肠易激综合征患者和肠易激综合征亚组患者的粪便细菌标记物和DI与肠易激综合征患者和肠易激综合征亚组患者的粪便细菌标记物和DI的差异:结果:搜索发现了 28 篇引文,其中包括 5 篇文章。大多数研究评估了以腹泻为主的 IBS(IBS-D)患者的粪便细菌标记物和 DI。然而,有两项研究显示,与普通人相比,IBS-D 患者的反刍球菌含量增加,而 DI 的结果表明,与普通人相比,IBS 和 IBS 亚组(尤其是 IBS-D)的 DI 较高:本系统综述显示,在使用基于 16S rRNA 测序的 GA-map 菌群失调测试的研究中,IBS 和 IBS 亚组与 HCs 之间细菌标记物的差异结果不一致。然而,该检测方法非常新颖,迄今为止使用该方法的研究很少。我们需要进行更多的研究,利用相同的分析方法比较 IBS 和 IBS 亚群与 HCs 的粪便微生物群谱差异,从而进一步了解 IBS 的肠道细菌谱以及肠道菌群失调的临床后果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Systematic Review: Fecal Bacterial Profile in Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome Analyzed with the GA-Map Dysbiosis Test Based on the 16S rRNA Gene of Bacterial Species or Groups.

Purpose: The diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is based on symptom-based criteria due to lack of reliable disease-specific biomarkers. Gut microbiota is perturbed in IBS and when comparing different methods used to analyze gut microbiota, the results might be obscured. Therefore, in this systematic review we aimed to investigate the profile of fecal bacterial markers and dysbiosis index (DI) in patients with IBS and IBS subgroups compared to healthy controls (HCs) conducted by the same method (GA-map Dysbiosis Test based on16S rRNA sequencing).

Material and method: We searched PubMed, EMBASE (Ovid) and Cochrane Library for case-control studies comparing fecal gut microbiota analyzed with the GA-map® Dysbiosis Test (Oslo, Norway) in patients with IBS and HCs. Our outcomes were the difference in fecal bacterial markers and DI in patients with IBS and IBS subgroups compared to HCs.

Results: The search identified 28 citations; five articles were included. Most studies evaluated fecal bacterial markers and DI in patients with diarrhea-predominant IBS (IBS-D). Results of fecal bacteria profile in IBS and IBS subgroups compared to HCs are inconsistent, however, two studies showed increased levels of Ruminococcus gnavus in IBS-D compared to HCs and results of DI indicated IBS and IBS subgroups (especially IBS-D) having higher DI compared to HCs.

Conclusion: This systematic review revealed inconsistent findings in respect to differences in bacterial markers between IBS and IBS subgroups with HCs in studies using the GA-map Dysbiosis Test based on 16S rRNA sequencing. However, the test is quite novel, and few studies have used the method so far. More research comparing fecal microbiota profile differences in IBS and IBS subgroups compared to HCs utilizing the same method of analysis is needed to give us further insight into the gut bacteria profile in IBS and the clinical consequences of intestinal dysbiosis.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Tumor-Stroma Ratio is a Critical Indicator of Peritoneal Metastasis in Gastric Cancer. Managing Leaks and Fistulas After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Challenges and Solutions. Associations of Schizophrenia and Major Depressive Disorder with Constipation: A Mendelian Randomization Study. Erratum: Review of the Patient Burden and Therapeutic Landscape of Irritable Bowel Syndrome with Constipation in the United States [Corrigendum]. Therapeutic Potential of Etrasimod in the Management of Moderately-to-Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis: Evidence to Date.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1