Suppr超能文献

直肠拭子、手套尖和参与者采集粪便技术在肠道微生物组采样中的比较。

Comparison of rectal swab, glove tip, and participant-collected stool techniques for gut microbiome sampling.

机构信息

University of Texas Health San Antonio, Glenn Biggs Institute for Alzheimer's and Neurodegenerative Diseases, San Antonio, TX, USA.

Department of Urology, University of Texas Health San Antonio, 7703 Floyd Curl Drive, San Antonio, TX, 78229, USA.

出版信息

BMC Microbiol. 2021 Jan 14;21(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s12866-020-02080-3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Studies of the gut microbiome are becoming increasingly important. Such studies require stool collections that can be processed or frozen in a timely manner so as not to alter the microbial content. Due to the logistical difficulties of home-based stool collection, there has been a challenge in selecting the appropriate sample collection technique and comparing results from different microbiome studies. Thus, we compared stool collection and two alternative clinic-based fecal microbiome collection techniques, including a newer glove-based collection method.

RESULTS

We prospectively enrolled 22 adult men from our prostate cancer screening cohort SABOR (San Antonio Biomarkers of Risk for prostate cancer) in San Antonio, TX, from 8/2018 to 4/2019. A rectal swab and glove tip sample were collected from each participant during a one-time visit to our clinics. A single stool sample was collected at the participant's home. DNA was isolated from the fecal material and 16 s rRNA sequencing of the V1-V2 and V3-V4 regions was performed. We found the gut microbiome to be similar in richness and evenness, noting no differences in alpha diversity among the collection methods. The stool collection method, which remains the gold-standard method for the gut microbiome, proved to have different community composition compared to swab and glove tip techniques (p< 0.001) as measured by Bray-Curtis and unifrac distances. There were no significant differences in between the swab and glove tip samples with regard to beta diversity (p> 0.05). Despite differences between home-based stool and office-based fecal collection methods, we noted that the distance metrics for the three methods cluster by participant indicating within-person similarities. Additionally, no taxa differed among the methods in a Linear Discriminant Analysis Effect Size (LEfSe) analysis comparing all-against-all sampling methods.

CONCLUSION

The glove tip method provides similar gut microbiome results as rectal swab and stool microbiome collection techniques. The addition of a new office-based collection technique could help easy and practical implementation of gut microbiome research studies and clinical practice.

摘要

背景

肠道微生物组的研究变得越来越重要。此类研究需要及时进行粪便采集和处理或冷冻,以免改变微生物含量。由于家庭粪便采集的后勤困难,因此在选择合适的样本采集技术和比较不同微生物组研究结果方面存在挑战。因此,我们比较了粪便采集和两种替代的基于诊所的粪便微生物组采集技术,包括一种较新的手套采集方法。

结果

我们前瞻性地招募了来自德克萨斯州圣安东尼奥 SABOR(前列腺癌筛查队列中的生物标志物)的 22 名成年男性,时间为 2018 年 8 月至 2019 年 4 月。每位参与者在我们的诊所进行一次性就诊时,我们从他们那里采集直肠拭子和手套尖样本。参与者在家中采集一份粪便样本。从粪便材料中提取 DNA,并对 V1-V2 和 V3-V4 区域进行 16s rRNA 测序。我们发现肠道微生物组在丰富度和均匀度方面相似,注意到三种采集方法的 alpha 多样性没有差异。粪便采集方法仍然是肠道微生物组的金标准方法,与拭子和手套尖端技术相比,其群落组成存在差异(p<0.001),通过 Bray-Curtis 和 unifrac 距离来衡量。拭子和手套尖端样本之间的 beta 多样性没有显著差异(p>0.05)。尽管家庭粪便和办公室粪便采集方法之间存在差异,但我们注意到,三种方法的距离指标按参与者聚类,表明个体内的相似性。此外,在比较所有采样方法的线性判别分析效应大小(LEfSe)分析中,没有任何分类群在方法之间存在差异。

结论

手套尖端方法提供与直肠拭子和粪便微生物组采集技术相似的肠道微生物组结果。增加新的基于办公室的采集技术可以帮助轻松和实用地实施肠道微生物组研究和临床实践。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4143/7809826/cbcf01bff889/12866_2020_2080_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验