Effect of Exclusion Diets on Symptom Severity and the Gut Microbiota in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome

30Citations
Citations of this article
104Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background & Aims: Altered fecal microbiota have been reported in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), although studies vary, which could be owing to dietary effects. Many IBS patients may eliminate certain foods because of their symptoms, which in turn may alter fecal microbiota diversity and composition. This study aimed to determine if dietary patterns were associated with IBS, symptoms, and fecal microbiota differences reported in IBS. Methods: A total of 346 IBS participants and 170 healthy controls (HCs) completed a Diet Checklist reflecting the diet(s) consumed most frequently. An exclusion diet was defined as a diet that eliminated food components by choice. Within this group, a gluten-free, dairy-free, or low fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols diet was further defined as restrictive because they often are implicated in reducing symptoms. Stool samples were obtained from 171 IBS patients and 98 HCs for 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing and microbial composition analysis. Results: Having IBS symptoms was associated with consuming a restrictive diet (27.17% of IBS patients vs 7.65% of HCs; odds ratio, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.66–6.75; P value =.006). IBS participants on an exclusion or restrictive diet reported more severe IBS symptoms (P =.042 and.029, respectively). The composition of the microbiota in IBS patients varied depending on the diet consumed. IBS participants on an exclusion diet had a greater abundance of Lachnospira and a lower abundance of Eubacterium (q value,

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lenhart, A., Dong, T., Joshi, S., Jaffe, N., Choo, C., Liu, C., … Chang, L. (2022). Effect of Exclusion Diets on Symptom Severity and the Gut Microbiota in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 20(3), e465–e483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2021.05.027

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free