| Literature DB >> 35847080 |
Alexis P Arnaud1,2, Ianis Cousin3, Françoise Schmitt4, Thierry Petit5, Benoit Parmentier6, Guillaume Levard6, Guillaume Podevin4, Audrey Guinot7, Stéphan DeNapoli7, Erik Hervieux8, Valérie Flaum8, Philine De Vries3, Gwénaëlle Randuineau1, Sandrine David-Le Gall1, Sylvie Buffet-Bataillon1,9, Gaëlle Boudry1.
Abstract
Background andEntities:
Keywords: Hirschsprung disease; Hirschsprung's associated enterocolitis (HAEC); children; fecal microbiota; proinflammatory bacteria
Year: 2022 PMID: 35847080 PMCID: PMC9279138 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2022.904758
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 6.064
Figure 1MICROPRUNG cohort characteristics. Flowchart of the cohort (A), Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis incidence as a function of age (B), age at surgery (C), existence of colostomy before surgery (D), length of the resected segment (E), and occurrence of complications more than 1 month after surgery (F). *P < 0.05 for HAEC incidence.
Patients' characteristics.
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 103 | 78 (76%) | 25 (24%) | |
| Sex ratio male/female | 4.1 | 3.5 | 7.3 | 0.4 |
| History of Hirschsprung in the family | 13 | 12 | 1 | 0.2 |
| Birth weight (g) | 3,425 ± 782 | 3,400 ± 785 | 3,565 ± 650 | 0.9 |
| Age at surgery (days) | 51 ± 67 | 48 ± 67 | 77 ± 90 | 0.3 |
| Age at study (months) | 59 ± 97 | 55 ± 91 | 66 ± 108 | 0.2 |
| Age groups | ||||
| 0–2 years | 24 | 20 | 4 | |
| 2–6 years | 36 | 26 | 10 | |
| Years | 26 | 21 | 5 | |
| >12years | 17 | 11 | 6 | |
| Functional evaluationa | ||||
| Voluntary bowel movement | 51 (77%) | 38 (79%) | 13 (72%) | 0.5 |
| Soiling symptoms | 54 (83%) | 38 (79%) | 16 (89%) | 0.7 |
| Constipation | 21 (32%) | 16 (33%) | 5 (28%) | 0.7 |
| Ann-Harbor score | ||||
| 2–6y | ||||
| Poor | – | 0% | 25% | <0.05 |
| Fair | – | 28% | 0% | |
| Good | – | 33% | 25% | |
| Excellent | – | 39% | 50% | |
| 6–12y | ||||
| Poor | – | 0% | 0% | |
| Fair | – | 5% | 0% | |
| Good | – | 38% | 44% | |
| Excellent | – | 57% | 56% | |
| 12–16y | ||||
| Poor | – | 0% | 0% | |
| Fair | – | 0% | 17% | <0.05 |
| Good | – | 0% | 50% | <0.05 |
| Excellent | – | 100% | 33% | <0.05 |
aEvaluation performed only on patients older than 3 years (47 HD and 18 HAEC).
Figure 2Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis incidence and factors known to modulate gut microbiota. Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis incidence as a function of stool consistency (A), delivery mode (B), breast-feeding (C), treatment for transit (D), antibiotic within the last 6 months (E), probiotic treatment (F) or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) (G) in the different age groups. *P < 0.05 for Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis incidence.
Figure 3Characteristics of fecal microbiota of the MICROPRUNG cohort. Principal coordinates analysis representation of Jaccard distance between fecal microbiota highlighting age group (A) or Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis status (B). Number of observed species (C) and Shannon index (D) of the microbiota in function of age group and Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis status. ****P < 0.0001.
Figure 4Main phyla relative abundances of fecal microbiota in the MICROPRUNG cohort. Relative abundance of Actinobacteria (A), Proteobacteria (B), Bacteroidetes (C), and Firmicutes (D) in function of age group and Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis status. *P < 0.05.
Three OTUs were significantly associated with Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis history in 0–2 year old patients, independent of other possible confounding factors.
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Firmicutes, Oscillospiraceae, | 2.4 ×10−2 | 2.0 ×10−10 | 2.8 ×10−7 | 2.3 ×10−2 | 1.6 ×10−8 | 3.6 ×10−5 | 2.6 ×10−2 | 3.3 ×10−10 | 6.5 ×10−7 | 2.6 ×10−2 | 4.7 ×10−6 | 9.1 ×10−3 |
| Actinobacteriota, Eggerthellaceae, | 5.4 ×10−3 | 2.6 ×10−10 | 2.8 ×10−7 | 5.2 ×10−3 | 1.7 ×10−8 | 3.6 ×10−5 | 6.0 ×10−3 | 3.0 ×10−10 | 6.5 ×10−7 | 6.1 ×10−3 | 8.6 ×10−7 | 2.4 ×10−3 |
| Firmicutes, Lachnospiraceae, | 1.7 ×10−3 | 1.3 ×10−6 | 5.9 ×10−3 | 1.7 ×10−3 | 8.8 ×10−6 | 5.9 ×10−3 | 1.7 ×10−3 | 1.6 ×10−5 | 5.9 ×10−3 | – | – | – |
| Firmicutes, Lachnospiraceae, | 7.5 ×10−3 | 1.3 ×10−5 | 1.7 ×10−3 | − | – | – | 8.6 ×10−3 | 7.7 ×10−6 | 4.0 ×10−3 | – | – | – |
| Firmicutes, Ruminococcacea, | 1.5 ×10−2 | 1.5 ×10−5 | 1.9 ×10−3 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Firmicutes, Lachnospiraceae, | 1.3 ×10−3 | 5.0 ×10−5 | 4.1 ×10−3 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Firmicutes, Lachnospiraceae, | 8.5 ×10−3 | 2.3 ×10−5 | 2.2 ×10−3 | − | − | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Firmicutes, Lachnospiraceae, | 4.1 ×10−2 | 6.9 ×10−5 | 4.8 ×10−3 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – |
aAntibiotics, transit treatment, Coef= model coefficient value (effect size) for that particular OTU, i.e., contrast between 0–2 year old HAEC group and 0–2 year old HD group taken as reference, P-value=nominal significance of the association in the model, Q-value=corrected significance of the association based on the whole dataset.
MaAsLin results for association of OTU with 0–2 year old HAEC patients. Only OTU associated with the 0–2 year old HAEC patient group with a Q-value > 0.01 and present in at least 40% of the samples (i.e., more than 41 patients out of the 103) were selected.