ArticleBJS open2020
Alterations in blood microbiota after colonic cancer surgery.
Article in BJS open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microbiota in the Tumor Metastatic Cascade: Emerging Evidence Across Invasion, Circulation, and Colonization.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Article
- Blood microbiome signatures in systemic diseases: current insights, methodological pitfalls, and future horizons.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Review
- Occult bacteremia in living donor liver transplantation: a prospective observational study of recipients and donors.Surgery today · 2024Observational
- Circulating Microbial Cell-Free DNA in Health and Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Review
- Prognostic significance of the microbiome-adipose tissue axis in rectal cancer: protocol of a prospective observational study.BJS open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMechanisms contributing to the perioperative stress response remain poorly understood. This study investigated changes in the amount of bacterial DNA in blood and the diversity of blood microbiota in the perioperative period in patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery for colonic cancer in an enhanced recovery after surgery setting.
methodsDNA encoding the bacterial 16S ribosomal RNA gene (16S rDNA) in whole blood obtained the day before surgery, and on postoperative day (POD) 1 and POD 10-14 was amplified and quantified by PCR before sequencing for taxonomic assignment. Richness, evenness and similarity measures were calculated to compare microbiota between days. Differences in relative abundance were analysed using the linear discriminant analysis effect size (LEfSe) algorithm.
resultsThirty patients were included between January and July 2016. The concentration of bacterial 16S rDNA in blood increased between the day before surgery and POD 1 (P = 0.025). Bacterial richness was lower on POD 10-14 than on the day before surgery and POD 1 (both P < 0·001). LEfSe analysis comparing the day before surgery and POD 10-14 identified changes in the abundance of several bacteria, including Fusobacterium nucleatum, which was relatively enriched on POD 10-14.
conclusionThese findings suggest that the blood of patients with colonic cancer harbours bacterial 16S rDNA, which increases in concentration after surgery.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.