ArticleNeurogastroenterology and motility2025
Third generation sequencing analysis detects significant differences in duodenal microbiome composition between functional dyspepsia patients and control subjects.
Article in Neurogastroenterology and motility, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intervention WithFood science & nutrition · 2026Article
- Rubber seed cake supplementation alters meat quality, intestinal health, and gut microbiota in Hu sheep.Animal microbiome · 2026Article
- Clinical Evidence Linking the Gut Microbiome and Functional Dyspepsia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Alterations in gut microbiome and fecal metabolome in functional dyspepsia patients: insights into pathophysiological mechanisms.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Why are disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI) often food-related? Duodenal eosinophils and mast cells, small intestinal bacteria, food allergy and altered food intake in functional dyspepsia and the irritable bowel syndrome: a new paradigm.Journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Therapeutic Role of Probiotics for the Treatment of Dyspepsia: A Review of the Literature.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2025Review
- Precision Medicine in Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025Article
- Dietary microbes and functional dyspepsia: modulating the gut microecology for therapeutic benefit.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
- Third generation sequencing analysis detects significant differences in duodenal microbiome composition between functional dyspepsia patients and control subjects.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFunctional dyspepsia (FD) is a multifactorial disorder as its development may be based on several different pathophysiological mechanisms. Interaction of gut microbiome with the host has been proposed as a potential mechanism involved in the disease's pathogenesis. AIM/
methodsWe aimed to characterize microbiome profiling on duodenal luminal content (DLC) of FD patients and compare it to that of controls (CG) and patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Outpatients fulfilling Rome IV criteria for FD, IBS, and control group (CG) underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and 2 cc of duodenal aspirate (3rd - 4th part) was aspirated in sterile traps. Duodenal microbiome was assessed after DNA extraction and 16S gene-based sequencing on Oxford Nanopore MinION followed by EPI2ME analysis (ONT/Metrich-ore Ltd). Bioanalysis of the microbiome (alpha-, beta-diversity, comparisons of relative abundances for all taxonomic ranks) was implemented in Python. Multiple group means comparisons were performed with one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Kruskal-Wallis test with Tuckey's and Dunn's post hoc tests respectively, in case of significance (P-value <0.05).
results20 subjects with FD (8 females; age 49.9 ± 13.5 yrs.), 20 with IBS (14 females; age 57.6 ± 14.8 yrs.) and 10 CG (6 females; age 49.2 ± 13.8 yrs.) had their DLC analyzed. The α-diversity index of subjects with FD was significantly lower compared to controls (Shannon's index, p = 0.0218) and similar to that of patients with IBS. Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA) generated from species relative abundances (beta-diversity) showed no difference in the DLC profile of subjects with FD and IBS when compared to controls (p = 0.513). Compared to controls, the relative abundance (RA) of Chloroflexota phylum was lower in subjects with FD (p = 0.017) and IBS (p = 0.026), respectively. Additionally, the RA of the Rhodothermota and Thermotogota phyla was lower in FD (p = 0.017 and p = 0.018, respectively) but not in IBS patients (p = 0.15 and p = 0.06, respectively) compared to controls. Interestingly, the RA of specific taxa from Chloroflexota, Rhodothermota and Thermotogota phyla were consistently lower in subjects with FD when compared to CG but similar to IBS, during analysis of all the subsequent major ranks of taxonomy. At the class level, there were significant differences in Syntrophobacteria, Acidithiobacillia, Cytophagia and Flavobacteriia between the FD and CG groups (p < 0.05), but no such difference between FD and IBS was found. Finally, multiple significant differences at the order, family, genus and species level between the FD and CG groups were also detected. A positive relationship between the RA of Streptococcus and those from genus Granulicatella was observed both in FD (p = 0.014) and IBS (p = 0.014) patients. CONCLUSION & INFERENCES: The microbiome profiling from duodenal luminal content of FD patients is significantly different to that of controls, including lower microflora diversity, different microflora structure/composition and specific taxa. Similar differences in the DLC between FD and IBS patients were not evident.
Indexed as
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.