| Literature DB >> 35484500 |
Mesa Victoria1,2, Valdés-Duque Beatriz Elena3, Giraldo-Giraldo Nubia Amparo4, Jailler-R Ana María5, Giraldo-Villa Adriana6, Acevedo-Castaño Irene7, Yepes-M Mónica Alejandra8, Barbosa-Barbosa Janeth9, Agudelo-Ochoa Gloria María4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aging generates changes in the gut microbiota, affecting its functionality. Little is known about gut microbiota in critically ill older adults. The objective of this study was to describe the profile of gut microbiota in a cohort of critically ill older adults.Entities:
Keywords: Critically ill; Dysbiosis; Gut microbiota; ICU; Older adults; Sepsis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35484500 PMCID: PMC9047279 DOI: 10.1186/s12877-022-02981-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Geriatr ISSN: 1471-2318 Impact factor: 4.070
Fig. 1Flowchart of patients enrolled in the study
General and clinical characteristics of the study population
| Variable | Adults > 60 years | Adults < 60 years | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Male | 34 (47.2) | 49 (59) | 0.141 |
| Female | 38 (52.8) | 34 (41) | |
| 25.2 ± 4.1 | 24.4 ± 3.9 | 0.265 | |
| Under weight | 20 (24.8) | 5 (6) | 0.001 |
| Adequate | 32 (44.4) | 44 (53.0) | |
| Excess weight | 20 (27.8) | 34 (41.0) | |
| Trauma | 4 (5.6) | 22 (26.5) | 0.817 |
| Pulmonary | 16 (22.2) | 7 (8.4) | |
| Cardio cerebral vascular | 14 (19.4) | 10 (12) | |
| Renal/liver/pancreatic | 6 (8.3) | 4 (4.8) | |
| Surgery | 4 (5,6) | 5 (6,0) | |
| Infection disease | 26 (36,1) | 24 (28.9) | |
| Other diagnoses d | 2 (2.8) | 11 (13.3) | |
| Yes | 42 (58.3) | 30 (36.1) | 0.006 |
| No | 30 (41.7) | 53 (63.9) | |
| 157 (124.2;188.5) | 153 (121;206.3) | 0.896 | |
| 8,9 (4.4;22.6) | 11.9 (6.3;22.3) | 0.437 | |
| 3 (1;8) | 1 (1;6) | 0.029 | |
| 21 ± 8 | 15 ± 8 | 0.000 | |
| Yes | 42 (58.3) | 29 (34.9) | 0.004 |
| No | 30 (41.7) | 54 (65.1) | |
| Yes | 64 (88,9) | 64 (77.1) | 0.054 |
| No | 8 (11.1) | 19 (22.9) | |
| 9 (5;15) | 7 (4;17) | 0.392 | |
| 0.206 | |||
| Alive | 49 (68.1) | 64 (77.1) | |
| Dead | 23 (31.9) | 19 (22.9) | |
a Data are presented as mean and percentage
b Data are presented as mean ± SD
c Data are presented as median and interquartile ranges
d Addictions, anxiety attacks, poisoning, circulatory disorder, neuromuscular disorder, cancer
e Group-wise comparisons of the variables. For the qualitative variables the Chi-square test was used; according to the distribution of quantitative variables, the T-test or Mann-Whitney U test was applied for the independent groups; p < 0.05
BMI Body Mass Index
CRP C-reactive protein
SOFA Sequential Organ Failure Assessment
APACHE II Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation
ICU Intensive Care Unit
Fig. 2Representation of bacterial phyla (A) and genera (B) in the age groups
Fig. 3Analysis of alpha diversity in the age groups. Richness and diversity in the gut microbiota of older patients over 60 years old (pink) and patients under 60 years old (blue) in critical illness. Chao1, Shannon, Simpson’s reciprocal and phylogenetic diversity index. Wilcoxon range test was performed to analyze statistical significance between groups
Fig. 4Structure of the microbial community. Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) based on weighted and unweighted UniFrac distances by age and gender groups. The boxplot on the right quantifies the divergence of gut microbiota between groups of the variables represented
Interactiona between the most frequent ASVs (p < 0.05) and analyzed variables
| Variable | Groups | ASV | Top ASVs associated | Adjusted | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | 16 | 0.0002 | 0.4902 (2.87) | ||
| 0.0037 | 0.0186 (−1.12) | ||||
| 0.0050 | 0.9653 (0.96) | ||||
| 0.0080 | 0.6948 (1.21) | ||||
| 0.0091 | 0.8548 (−0.16) | ||||
| Discharge condition | 11 | 0.0014 | 0.3616 (1.45) | ||
| 0.0021 | 0.8945 (0.73) | ||||
| 0.0109 | 0.8616 (0.43) | ||||
| 0.0201 | 0.8327 (0.31) | ||||
| 0.0244 | 0.9143 (0.33) | ||||
| BMI | 10 | 0.0002 | 0.3271 (1.62) | ||
| 0.0009 | 0.1710 (2.02) | ||||
| 0.0012 | 0.1376 (2.30) | ||||
| 0.0048 | 0.258 (1.38) | ||||
| 0.0060 | 0.3721 (1.02) | ||||
| ICU stay (days) | 7 | 0.0084 | 0.517 (−1.00) | ||
| 0.0156 | 0.3882 (−1.24) | ||||
| 0.0228 | 0.2848 (−0.98) | ||||
| 0.0263 | 0.6419 (0.70) | ||||
| 0.0278 | 0.3588 (−0.27) | ||||
| Age group (years) | 6 | 0.0017 | |||
| 0.0037 | |||||
| 0.0059 | |||||
| 0.0087 | |||||
| 0.0112 | |||||
| 0.0199 | |||||
| Antibiotics | 5 | 0.0163 | 0.8548 (0.43) | ||
| 0.0324 | 0.1946 (0.36) | ||||
| 0.0452 | 0.1229 (−0.12) | ||||
| 0.0459 | 0.3059 (0.68) | ||||
| 0.0463 | 0.6807 (0.89) |
aLinear mixed model and adjustment by interactions. The reference group for the comparison is highlighted in bold. The most representative ASVs associated with each variable included in the model are shown; after adjusting for all factors, the last column shows the p-value and in parentheses the sense of the interaction
Fig. 5ASVs associated with the age group. Gardner-Altman estimation plots display effect size as the mean difference between age group (∆) and is shown on the right of the respective plots. ∆ is plotted as a black dot which indicates the resampled distribution of ∆, it is reported on a log scale and is referred to as observed in the patients over 60 years old group (p ≤ 0.01). The 95% confidence interval of ∆ is indicated by the ends of the vertical error bar