Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29597877›Full record

ArticleExperimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.)2018

EB 2017 Article: Interpretation of the lactulose:mannitol test in rural Malawian children at risk for perturbations in intestinal permeability.

M Isabel Ordiz, Caroline Davitt, Kevin Stephenson, Sophia Agapova, Oscar Divala, Nurmohammad Shaikh, Mark J Manary

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Crosstalk between Resveratrol and Gut Barrier: A Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Starvation and Its Effects on the Gut.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Co-occurrence ofFrontiers in public health · 2020
    Article
  19. Frontiers in public health · 2020
    Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

M Isabel Ordiz1 Department of Pediatrics, Washington University at Saint Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Caroline Davitt1 Department of Pediatrics, Washington University at Saint Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Kevin Stephenson1 Department of Pediatrics, Washington University at Saint Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Sophia Agapova1 Department of Pediatrics, Washington University at Saint Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Oscar Divala2 School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Malawi, Blantyre 3, Malawi.
Nurmohammad Shaikh1 Department of Pediatrics, Washington University at Saint Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Mark J Manary1 Department of Pediatrics, Washington University at Saint Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Washington University in St. Louis · USChildren's Nutrition Research Center at Baylor College of Medicine · USUniversity of Malawi · MW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The dual sugar absorption test, specifically the lactulose:mannitol test, is used to assess gut health. Lactulose absorption is said to represent gut damage and mannitol absorption is used as a measure of normal small bowel function and serves as normalizing factor for lactulose. A underappreciated limitation of this common understanding of the lactulose:mannitol test is that mannitol is not absorbed to any substantial extent by a transcellular process. Additionally, this interpretation of lactulose:mannitol is not consistent with current understanding of paracellular pathways, where three pathway types exist: pore, leak, and unrestricted. Pore and leak pathways are regulated biological constructions of the small bowel barrier, and unrestricted pathways represent micropathological damage. We analyzed 2334 lactulose:mannitol measurements rigorously collected from 622 young rural Malawian children at high risk for poor gut health in light of the pathway model. An alternative method of normalizing for gut length utilizing autopsy data is described. In our population, absorbed lactulose and mannitol are strongly correlated, r = 0.68 P <0.0001, suggesting lactulose and mannitol are traversing the gut barrier via the same pathways. Considering measurements where pore pathways predominate, mannitol flux is about 14 times that of lactulose. As more leak pathways are present, this differential flux mannitol:lactulose falls to 8:1 and when increased numbers of unrestricted pathways are present, the differential flux of mannitol:lactulose is 6:1. There was no substantial correlation between the lactulose:mannitol and linear growth. Given that mannitol will always pass through a given pathway at a rate at least equal to that of lactulose, and lactulose absorption is a composite measure of flux through both physiologic and pathologic pathways, we question the utility of the lactulose:mannitol test. We suggest using lactulose alone is as informative as lactulose:mannitol in a sugar absorption testing in subclinical gut inflammation. Impact statement Our work integrates the standard interpretation of the lactulose:mannitol test (L:M), with mechanistic insight of intestinal permeability. There are three paracellular pathways in the gut epithelium; pore, leak, and unrestricted. Using thousands of L:M measurements from rural Malawian children at risk for increased intestinal permeability, we predict the differential flux of L and M through the pathways. Our findings challenge the traditional notions that little L is absorbed through a normal epithelial barrier and that M is a normalizing factor for L. Our observations are consistent with pore pathways allowing only M to pass. And that substantial amounts of L and M pass through leak pathways which are normal, regulated, cell-junctional adaptations. So M is a composite measure of all pathways, and L is not a measure solely of pathologic gut damage. Using L alone as a probe will yield more information about gut health than L:M.

Indexed as

Intestinal AbsorptionAnimalsChild, PreschoolDiagnostic Tests, RoutineGastrointestinal DiseasesHumansInfantIntestine, SmallLactuloseMalawiMannitolPermeabilityRural PopulationLactuloseMannitoldual sugar absorption testEnvironmental enteric dysfunctiongut healthlactulose:mannitol testparacellular permeability

Identifiers

PMID29597877
PMCPMC6378510
OpenAlexW2794885039

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.