...
首页> 外文期刊>Microbiome >Comparison of brush and biopsy sampling methods of the ileal pouch for assessment of mucosa-associated microbiota of human subjects
【24h】

Comparison of brush and biopsy sampling methods of the ileal pouch for assessment of mucosa-associated microbiota of human subjects

机译:回肠囊刷和活检取样方法在评估粘膜相关微生物群方面的比较

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background Mucosal biopsy is the most common sampling technique used to assess microbial communities associated with the intestinal mucosa. Biopsies disrupt the epithelium and can be associated with complications such as bleeding. Biopsies sample a limited area of the mucosa, which can lead to potential sampling bias. In contrast to the mucosal biopsy, the mucosal brush technique is less invasive and provides greater mucosal coverage, and if it can provide equivalent microbial community data, it would be preferable to mucosal biopsies. Results We compared microbial samples collected from the intestinal mucosa using either a cytology brush or mucosal biopsy forceps. We collected paired samples from patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who had previously undergone colectomy and ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA), and profiled the microbial communities of the samples by sequencing V4-V6 or V4-V5 16S rRNA-encoding gene amplicons. Comparisons of 177 taxa in 16 brush-biopsy sample pairs had a mean R2 of 0.94. We found no taxa that varied significantly between the brush and biopsy samples after adjusting for multiple comparisons (false discovery rate ≤0.05). We also tested the reproducibility of DNA amplification and sequencing in 25 replicate pairs and found negligible variation (mean R2?=?0.99). A qPCR analysis of the two methods showed that the relative yields of bacterial DNA to human DNA were several-fold higher in the brush samples than in the biopsies. Conclusions Mucosal brushing is preferred to mucosal biopsy for sampling the epithelial-associated microbiota. Although both techniques provide similar assessments of the microbial community composition, the brush sampling method has relatively more bacterial to host DNA, covers a larger surface area, and is less traumatic to the epithelium than the mucosal biopsy.
机译:背景技术粘膜活检是用于评估与肠粘膜相关的微生物群落的最常见采样技术。活检会破坏上皮,并可能伴有诸如出血的并发症。活检样本在粘膜的有限区域采样,这可能导致潜在的采样偏差。与粘膜活检相反,粘膜刷技术的侵入性较小,并且粘膜覆盖范围更大,如果可以提供等效的微生物群落数据,则比粘膜活检更可取。结果我们比较了使用细胞学刷或粘膜活检钳从肠粘膜收集的微生物样品。我们从先前接受结肠切除术和回肠袋肛门吻合术(IPAA)的溃疡性结肠炎(UC)患者中收集了成对的样本,并通过对V4-V6或V4-V5 16S rRNA编码基因扩增子进行测序,对样本的微生物群落进行了分析。在16个刷检活检样本对中比较177个分类单元的平均R2为0.94。在进行多次比较调整后,我们没有发现刷和活检样本之间的分类单元有显着差异(错误发现率≤0.05)。我们还测试了25个重复对中DNA扩增和测序的可再现性,发现变化可忽略不计(平均R2≥= 0.99)。两种方法的qPCR分析表明,刷状样品中细菌DNA与人DNA的相对产量比活检中的高出几倍。结论粘膜刷洗比粘膜活检更适合于上皮相关微生物的取样。尽管两种技术都可以对微生物群落组成进行类似的评估,但与黏膜活检相比,毛刷采样法具有相对更多的细菌来承载DNA,覆盖更大的表面积并且对上皮的伤害较小。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号