Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36636721›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2022

Early intestinal microbiota changes in aged and adult mice with sepsis.

Yangyang Yuan, Shaohua Liu, Xianfei Ding, Ying Li, Xiaojuan Zhang, Heng Song, Xueyan Qi, Zihao Zhang, Kaiyuan Guo, Tongwen Sun

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Pretreatment withFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
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

10 authors.

Yangyang YuanGeneral Intensive Care Unit, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Key Laboratory of Critical Care Medicine, Henan Engineering Research Center for Critical Care Medicine, Zhengzhou, China.
Shaohua LiuGeneral Intensive Care Unit, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Key Laboratory of Critical Care Medicine, Henan Engineering Research Center for Critical Care Medicine, Zhengzhou, China.
Xianfei DingGeneral Intensive Care Unit, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Key Laboratory of Critical Care Medicine, Henan Engineering Research Center for Critical Care Medicine, Zhengzhou, China.
Ying LiAcademy of Medical Sciences, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
Xiaojuan ZhangGeneral Intensive Care Unit, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Key Laboratory of Critical Care Medicine, Henan Engineering Research Center for Critical Care Medicine, Zhengzhou, China.
Heng SongGeneral Intensive Care Unit, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Key Laboratory of Critical Care Medicine, Henan Engineering Research Center for Critical Care Medicine, Zhengzhou, China.
Xueyan QiGeneral Intensive Care Unit, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Key Laboratory of Critical Care Medicine, Henan Engineering Research Center for Critical Care Medicine, Zhengzhou, China.
Zihao ZhangSanquan College Of Xinxiang Medical University, Xinxiang, China.
Kaiyuan GuoAcademy of Medical Sciences, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
Tongwen SunGeneral Intensive Care Unit, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Key Laboratory of Critical Care Medicine, Henan Engineering Research Center for Critical Care Medicine, Zhengzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The mortality rate associated with sepsis in elderly individuals is higher than that in younger individuals. The intestinal microbiota has been demonstrated to play an important role in the occurrence and development of sepsis. The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences in the intestinal microbiota between aged and adult mice with sepsis. Methods: Thirty male C57BL mice were randomly divided into two groups: 15 in the adult group (AD group) and 15 in the age group (Age group). All the mice underwent caecal ligation and puncture to induce sepsis. Mice faeces were collected, and analysed using 16S rRNA sequencing. The liver and colon tissues were collected. Results: There were significant differences in intestinal microbiota composition between the two groups. Compared with adult sepsis mice, the diversity of intestinal microbiota in the aged group was significantly reduced and the structure of dominant intestinal microbiota was changed. In the Age group, the microbiota associated with inflammatory factors increased, and the microbiota associated with the production of SCFAs (Ruminiclostridium, Prevotellaceae_UCG-001, Rikenella, Parabacteroides, Oscillibacter, Odoribacter, Muribaculum, Lachnoclostridium, Intestinimonas, Faecalibaculum, Anaerotruncus, Alloprevotella and Absiella) decreased. The metabolic pathways related to the microbiota also changed. Moreover, the proportion of inflammatory factors in Age group was higher than that in AD group. Conclusion: Our results showed that there were significant differences in the abundance and structure of microbiota between aged and adult sepsis mice, Aged sepsis mice have more severe intestinal microbiota destruction and liver tissue inflammation than adult sepsis mice.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeSepsisAnimalsBacillotaBacteroidetesColonMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 16S16Sadult miceaged miceintestinal microbiotasepsis

Identifiers

PMID36636721
PMCPMC9831679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.