Intestinal microbiota in patients with spinal cord injury

139Citations
Citations of this article
174Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Human intestinal flora comprises thousands of bacterial species. Growth and composition of intestinal microbiota is dependent on various parameters, including immune mechanisms, dietary factors and intestinal motility. Patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) frequently display neurogenic bowel dysfunction due to the absence of central nervous system control over the gastrointestinal system. Considering the bowel dysfunction and altered colonic transit time in patients with SCI, we hypothesized the presence of a significant change in the composition of their gut microbiome. The objective of this study was to characterize the gut microbiota in adult SCI patients with different types of bowel dysfunction. We tested our hypothesis on 30 SCI patients (15 upper motor neuron [UMN] bowel syndrome, 15 lower motor neuron [LMN] bowel syndrome) and 10 healthy controls using the 16S rRNA sequencing. Gut microbial patterns were sampled from feces. Independent of study groups, gut microbiota of the participants were dominated by Blautia, Bifidobacterium, Faecalibacterium and Ruminococcus. When we compared all study groups, Roseburia, Pseudobutyrivibrio, Dialister, Marvinbryantia and Megamonas appeared as the genera that were statistically different between groups. In comparison to the healthy group, total bacterial counts of Pseudobutyrivibrio, Dialister and Megamonas genera were significantly lower in UMN bowel dysfunction group. The total bacterial count of Marvinbryantia genus was significantly lower in UMN bowel dysfunction group when compared to the LMN group. Total bacterial counts of Roseburia, Pseudobutyrivibrio and Megamonas genera were significantly lower in LMN bowel dysfunction group when compared to healthy groups. Our results demonstrate for the first time that butyrate-producing members are specifically reduced in SCI patients when compared to healthy subjects. The results of this study would be of interest since to our knowledge, microbiome-associated studies targeting SCI patients are non-existent and the results might help explain possible implications of gut microbiome in SCI.

Figures

  • Fig 1. Flow diagram of the study design (UMN: Upper motor neuron, LMN: Lower motor neuron).
  • Table 1. Demographic characteristics of the participants.
  • Fig 2. Gut microbiome composition profiles that differed between UMN group (n = 15), LMN group (n = 15), and control group (n = 10). The values represent bacterial DNA counts in gut microbiome. (A) Total bacterial counts; (B) Pseudobutyrivibrio; (C) Dialister; (D) Megamonas; (E) Marvinbryantia; (F) Roseburia.
  • Fig 3. Hierarchical cluster analysis showing the relative percent abundance of each genus in the study groups.UMN: Upper motor neuron group; LMN: Lower motor neuron group; H: Healthy controls.

References Powered by Scopus

Greengenes, a chimera-checked 16S rRNA gene database and workbench compatible with ARB

8759Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The gut microbiota shapes intestinal immune responses during health and disease

3885Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Metabolites produced by commensal bacteria promote peripheral regulatory T-cell generation

3576Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Interactions between the microbiota, immune and nervous systems in health and disease

1383Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Neurological Disorders

287Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Gut dysbiosis impairs recovery after spinal cord injury

242Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gungor, B., Adiguzel, E., Gursel, I., Yilmaz, B., & Gursel, M. (2016). Intestinal microbiota in patients with spinal cord injury. PLoS ONE, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0145878

Readers over time

‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2509182736

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 60

58%

Researcher 30

29%

Professor / Associate Prof. 11

11%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

2%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 25

32%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 19

25%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18

23%

Neuroscience 15

19%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0