Niels van Best1,2, Sonja Trepels-Kottek3, Paul Savelkoul2, Thorsten Orlikowsky3, Mathias W Hornef1, John Penders2,4. 1. Institute of Medical Microbiology, RWTH University Hospital Aachen, RWTH University Aachen , Aachen, Germany. 2. Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism (NUTRIM), Maastricht University , Maastricht, The Netherlands. 3. Section of Neonatology, University Children's Hospital , Aachen, Germany. 4. School of Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University , Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oral administration of probiotic bacteria to preterm neonates has been recommended to prevent the development of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). The influence of probiotics on the endogenous microbiome, however, has remained incompletely understood. STUDY DESIGN & METHODS: Here, we performed an observational study including 80 preterm neonates born at a gestational age <32-weeks to characterize the persistence of probiotic bacteria after no treatment or oral administration of two different probiotic formula and their influence on the microbial ecosystem during and after the intervention and their association with the development of NEC. Weekly fecal samples were profiled by 16S rRNA sequencing and monitored for the presence of the probiotic bacteria by quantitative PCR. RESULTS: Microbiota profiles differed significantly between the control group and both probiotic groups. Probiotic supplementation was associated with lower temporal variation as well as higher relative abundance of Bifidobacterium and Enterobacter combined with reduced abundance of Escherichia, Enterococcus, and Klebsiella. Colonization by probiotic bifidobacteria was observed in approximately 50% of infants although it remained transient in the majority of cases. A significantly reduced monthly incidence of NEC was observed in neonates supplemented with probiotics. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate successful transient colonization by probiotic bacteria and a significant influence on the endogenous microbiota with a reduced abundance of bacterial taxa associated with the development of NEC. These results emphasize that probiotic supplementation may allow targeted manipulation of the enteric microbiota and confer a clinical benefit. (Clinical Trial Registry accession number: DRKS/GCTR 00021034).
BACKGROUND: Oral administration of probiotic bacteria to preterm neonates has been recommended to prevent the development of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). The influence of probiotics on the endogenous microbiome, however, has remained incompletely understood. STUDY DESIGN & METHODS: Here, we performed an observational study including 80 preterm neonates born at a gestational age <32-weeks to characterize the persistence of probiotic bacteria after no treatment or oral administration of two different probiotic formula and their influence on the microbial ecosystem during and after the intervention and their association with the development of NEC. Weekly fecal samples were profiled by 16S rRNA sequencing and monitored for the presence of the probiotic bacteria by quantitative PCR. RESULTS: Microbiota profiles differed significantly between the control group and both probiotic groups. Probiotic supplementation was associated with lower temporal variation as well as higher relative abundance of Bifidobacterium and Enterobacter combined with reduced abundance of Escherichia, Enterococcus, and Klebsiella. Colonization by probiotic bifidobacteria was observed in approximately 50% of infants although it remained transient in the majority of cases. A significantly reduced monthly incidence of NEC was observed in neonates supplemented with probiotics. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate successful transient colonization by probiotic bacteria and a significant influence on the endogenous microbiota with a reduced abundance of bacterial taxa associated with the development of NEC. These results emphasize that probiotic supplementation may allow targeted manipulation of the enteric microbiota and confer a clinical benefit. (Clinical Trial Registry accession number: DRKS/GCTR 00021034).
Authors: Bashir Abdulkadir; Andrew Nelson; Tom Skeath; Emma C L Marrs; John D Perry; Stephen P Cummings; Nicholas D Embleton; Janet E Berrington; Christopher J Stewart Journal: Neonatology Date: 2016-02-10 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Anna Klindworth; Elmar Pruesse; Timmy Schweer; Jörg Peplies; Christian Quast; Matthias Horn; Frank Oliver Glöckner Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2012-08-28 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Mohan Pammi; Julia Cope; Phillip I Tarr; Barbara B Warner; Ardythe L Morrow; Volker Mai; Katherine E Gregory; J Simon Kroll; Valerie McMurtry; Michael J Ferris; Lars Engstrand; Helene Engstrand Lilja; Emily B Hollister; James Versalovic; Josef Neu Journal: Microbiome Date: 2017-03-09 Impact factor: 14.650
Authors: Nicole M Davis; Diana M Proctor; Susan P Holmes; David A Relman; Benjamin J Callahan Journal: Microbiome Date: 2018-12-17 Impact factor: 14.650
Authors: David Seki; Margareta Mayer; Bela Hausmann; Petra Pjevac; Vito Giordano; Katharina Goeral; Lukas Unterasinger; Katrin Klebermaß-Schrehof; Kim De Paepe; Tom Van de Wiele; Andreas Spittler; Gregor Kasprian; Benedikt Warth; Angelika Berger; David Berry; Lukas Wisgrill Journal: Cell Host Microbe Date: 2021-09-03 Impact factor: 21.023
Authors: Allison K Guitor; Efrah I Yousuf; Amogelang R Raphenya; Eileen K Hutton; Katherine M Morrison; Andrew G McArthur; Gerard D Wright; Jennifer C Stearns Journal: Microbiome Date: 2022-08-26 Impact factor: 16.837
Authors: Lauren C Beck; Andrea C Masi; Gregory R Young; Tommi Vatanen; Christopher A Lamb; Rachel Smith; Jonathan Coxhead; Alana Butler; Benjamin J Marsland; Nicholas D Embleton; Janet E Berrington; Christopher J Stewart Journal: Nat Microbiol Date: 2022-09-26 Impact factor: 30.964