| Literature DB >> 35034610 |
Dongxue Zhang1, Wenyan Liu2, Li Peng3, Haiyan Wang1, Mei Lin1, Yufeng Li4, Zuomin Wang5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To investigate the difference in the structural composition of salivary flora between chronic periodontitis patients with and without diabetic nephropathy (DN).Entities:
Keywords: Diabetes mellitus; Diabetic nephropathy; Oral microbiome; Periodontitis; Saliva
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35034610 PMCID: PMC8762855 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-021-01985-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Oral Health ISSN: 1472-6831 Impact factor: 2.757
Clinical characteristics of the study population
| DM group | DN group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years | 53.80 ± 12.08 | 58.00 ± 10.62 | 0.321 |
| Male, n (%) | 11 (73.33%) | 7 (46.67%) | 0.136 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 26.25 ± 3.07 | 27.65 ± 4.88 | 0.356 |
| Diabetes course (years) | 7.20 ± 5.81 | 13.98 ± 6.98 | 0.007** |
| Smoking, n (%) | 8 (52%) | 6 (40%) | 0.464 |
| Biochemical parameters | |||
| Urea nitrogen (mmol/L) | 5.76 (4.75, 6.77) | 7.27 (4.86, 9.14) | 0.181 |
| Uric acid (μmol/L) | 285.01 ± 101.90 | 390.53 ± 61.10 | 0.002** |
| FBG (mmol/L) | 9.46 ± 2.58 | 9.87 ± 3.49 | 0.712 |
| HbA1c (%) | 8.31 ± 2.27 | 7.99 ± 1.29 | 0.639 |
| Urinary albumin (mg/L) | 6.30 (5.00, 12.00) | 48.60 (28.40, 293.40) | < 0.001** |
| Urinary creatinine (μmol/L) | 53.10 (37.20, 90.50) | 63.90 (32.20, 84.60 | 0.925 |
| ACR (mg/g) | 13.12 (7.79, 25.64) | 78.98 (38.55, 354.61) | 0.001** |
| eGFR (ml/L) | 113.21 ± 24.25 | 85.51 ± 43.13 | 0.042* |
| Parameters of periodontitis | |||
| PD (mm) | 3.38 ± 0.95 | 3.37 ± 0.93 | 0.995 |
| BI | 3.31 ± 0.68 | 2.99 ± 0.70 | 0.377 |
| CAL (mm) | 4.64 ± 1.60 | 5.09 ± 2.00 | 0.216 |
| Remaining teeth numbers | 24.67 ± 4.98 | 22.87 ± 5.96 | 0.377 |
P-values calculated using two independent samples t test, Mann–Whitney U test, or Chi-squared test. P < 0.05 was statistically significant. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01
BMI, body mass index; LDL, low density lipoprotein; HDL, high density lipoprotein; FBG, fasting blood glucose; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; ACR, albumin creatinine ratio; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; PD, probing depth; BI, blooding index; CAL, clinical attachment loss
Fig. 1Analysis of oral microbiota composition in the study population (from phylum [a] to genus [b] level). For better visualization of the effect, parts with abundance < 1% have been merged and displayed in the figure
Fig. 2Shared and unique bacteria in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and diabetic nephropathy (DN). Different colors represent different groups. The overlap represents shared bacteria. There are 457 unique objects; of these, 431 appear in both groups
Fig. 3Alpha diversity of the saliva microbiome in patients with periodontitis and diabetes mellitus (DM) and patients with periodontitis and diabetic nephropathy (DN). (a) Ace index (P = 0.430) and (b) Chao index (P = 0.648) were abundance indices; (c) Shannon index (P = 0.468) and (d) Simpson index (P = 0.724) were diversity indices. The dots in Fig. 3C represent extreme values
Fig. 4Partial bacterial taxa that differed significantly between patients with periodontitis and diabetes mellitus (DM group) and patients with periodontitis and diabetic nephropathy (DN group), according to linear discriminant analysis coupled with effect size (LEfSe). (a) Shows bacterial clades that are differentially abundant in DM group (red), and DN group (green). Clades in this graph were both statistically significant (p < 0.05) and had a linear discriminants (LDAs) score ≥ 2.0, which is considered a significant effect size. The circle from the inside to the outside in (b) represents the classification level from phylum to genera. The diameters of circles represent the relative abundance. Yellow indicates no significant difference; red and green dots represent significant differences in the pedigree for DM group and DN group (respectively)
Fig. 5Mean relative abundance of the significantly altered microbiome in saliva among patients with periodontitis and diabetes mellitus (DM group) and patients with periodontitis and diabetic nephropathy (DN group). Between-group differences were assessed using the Mann–Whitney U test
Results of binary logistic regression analysis showing risk factors for diabetic nephropathy
| Model 1 | Model 2 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | OR | 95% CI | |||
| Gemella | 0 | 0.000–0.077 | 0.045 | 0.523 | 0.078–3.49 | 0.503 |
| 13.423 | 1.80–100.083 | 0.011 | 13.015 | 1.655–102.349 | 0.015 | |
Model 1, univariate analysis. Model 2, multivariate analysis adjusting the effect of age, gender, and BMI
Fig. 6KEGG analysis of differences in the composition of functional genes