OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The adenoid pad has been considered a reservoir for bacteria in the pathogenesis of otitis media with effusion. This study aimed to characterize the middle ear microbiota in children with otitis media with effusion and establish whether a correlation exists between the middle ear and adenoid microbiota. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, controlled study. METHODS: Middle ear aspirates adenoid pad swabs were collected from 23 children undergoing ventilation tube insertion. Adenoid swabs from patients without ear disease were controls. Samples were analyzed using 16S rRNA sequencing on the Illumina MiSeq platform. RESULTS: Thirty-five middle ear samples were collected. The middle ear effusion microbiota was dominated by Alloiococcus otitidis (23% mean relative abundance), Haemophilus (22%), Moraxella (5%), and Streptococcus (5%). Alloiococcus shared an inverse correlation with Haemophilus (P = .049) and was found in greater relative abundance in unilateral effusion (P = .004). The microbiota of bilateral effusions from the same patient were similar (P < .001). However, the otitis media with effusion microbiota were found to be dissimilar to that of the adenoid (P = .01), whereas the adenoid microbiota of otitis media with effusion and control patients were similar (P > .05) (permutational multivariate analysis of the variance). CONCLUSIONS: Dissimilarities between the local microbiota of the adenoid and the middle ear question the theory that the adenoid pad is a significant reservoir to the middle ear in children with otitis media with effusion. A otitidis had the greatest cumulative relative abundance, particularly in unilateral effusions, and shares an inverse correlation with the relative abundance of Haemophilus. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 126:2844-2851, 2016.
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The adenoid pad has been considered a reservoir for bacteria in the pathogenesis of otitis media with effusion. This study aimed to characterize the middle ear microbiota in children with otitis media with effusion and establish whether a correlation exists between the middle ear and adenoid microbiota. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, controlled study. METHODS: Middle ear aspirates adenoid pad swabs were collected from 23 children undergoing ventilation tube insertion. Adenoid swabs from patients without ear disease were controls. Samples were analyzed using 16S rRNA sequencing on the Illumina MiSeq platform. RESULTS: Thirty-five middle ear samples were collected. The middle ear effusion microbiota was dominated by Alloiococcus otitidis (23% mean relative abundance), Haemophilus (22%), Moraxella (5%), and Streptococcus (5%). Alloiococcus shared an inverse correlation with Haemophilus (P = .049) and was found in greater relative abundance in unilateral effusion (P = .004). The microbiota of bilateral effusions from the same patient were similar (P < .001). However, the otitis media with effusion microbiota were found to be dissimilar to that of the adenoid (P = .01), whereas the adenoid microbiota of otitis media with effusion and control patients were similar (P > .05) (permutational multivariate analysis of the variance). CONCLUSIONS: Dissimilarities between the local microbiota of the adenoid and the middle ear question the theory that the adenoid pad is a significant reservoir to the middle ear in children with otitis media with effusion. A otitidis had the greatest cumulative relative abundance, particularly in unilateral effusions, and shares an inverse correlation with the relative abundance of Haemophilus. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 126:2844-2851, 2016.
Authors: Marianne F L van den Broek; Ilke De Boeck; Filip Kiekens; An Boudewyns; Olivier M Vanderveken; Sarah Lebeer Journal: Clin Microbiol Rev Date: 2019-07-03 Impact factor: 26.132
Authors: Daniel N Frank; Arnaud P J Giese; Lena Hafren; Tori C Bootpetch; Talitha Karisse L Yarza; Matthew J Steritz; Melquiadesa Pedro; Patrick John Labra; Kathleen A Daly; Ma Leah C Tantoco; Wasyl Szeremeta; Maria Rina T Reyes-Quintos; Niaz Ahankoob; Erasmo Gonzalo D V Llanes; Harold S Pine; Sairah Yousaf; Diana Ir; Elisabet Einarsdottir; Rhodieleen Anne R de la Cruz; Nanette R Lee; Rachelle Marie A Nonato; Charles E Robertson; Kimberly Mae C Ong; Jose Pedrito M Magno; Alessandra Nadine E Chiong; Ma Carmina Espiritu-Chiong; Maria Luz San Agustin; Teresa Luisa G Cruz; Generoso T Abes; Michael J Bamshad; Eva Maria Cutiongco-de la Paz; Juha Kere; Deborah A Nickerson; Karen L Mohlke; Saima Riazuddin; Abner Chan; Petri S Mattila; Suzanne M Leal; Allen F Ryan; Zubair M Ahmed; Tasnee Chonmaitree; Michele M Sale; Charlotte M Chiong; Regie Lyn P Santos-Cortez Journal: J Med Genet Date: 2020-07-24 Impact factor: 6.318
Authors: Mahmood F Bhutta; Ruth B Thornton; Lea-Ann S Kirkham; Joseph E Kerschner; Michael T Cheeseman Journal: Dis Model Mech Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 5.758
Authors: Stefan A Boers; Marjolein de Zeeuw; Ruud Jansen; Marc P van der Schroeff; Annemarie M C van Rossum; John P Hays; Suzanne J C Verhaegh Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2018-02-05 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Rachael Lappan; Kara Imbrogno; Chisha Sikazwe; Denise Anderson; Danny Mok; Harvey Coates; Shyan Vijayasekaran; Paul Bumbak; Christopher C Blyth; Sarra E Jamieson; Christopher S Peacock Journal: BMC Microbiol Date: 2018-02-20 Impact factor: 3.605