ArticleScientific reports2024
Comparative analysis of the postadmission and antemortem oropharyngeal and rectal swab microbiota of ICU patients.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond the Lungs: ICU Oral Care and Gut Resilience-A Hypothesis-Generating Narrative Review.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Gut microbiota in chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder: shared mechanisms, disease-specific signatures, and therapeutic prospects.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- Analysis of ICU resistome dynamics in patients, staff and environment for the identification of predictive biomarkers of sepsis and early mortality.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A mini-review of the relationship between intestinal microecology and acute respiratory distress syndrome.PeerJ · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Shotgun metabarcoding was conducted to examine the microbiota in a total of 48 samples from 12 critically ill patients, analyzing samples from both the oropharynx and rectum. We aimed to compare their postadmission microbiota, characterized as moderately dysbiotic, with the severely dysbiotic antemortem microbiota associated with patients' deaths. We found that, compared with postadmission samples, patient antemortem swab samples presented moderate but not significantly decreased diversity indices. The antemortem oropharyngeal samples presented an increase in biofilm-forming bacteria, including Streptococcus oralis, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and Enterococcus faecalis. Although the septic shock rate was 67%, no significant differences were detected in the potential pathogen ratios when the microbiota was analyzed. A notable strain-sharing rate between the oropharynx and intestine was noted. By comparing postadmission and antemortem samples, microbial biomarkers of severe dysbiosis were pinpointed through the analysis of differentially abundant and uniquely emerging species in both oropharyngeal and rectal swabs. Demonstrating strong interconnectivity along the oral-intestinal axis, these biomarkers could serve as indicators of the progression of dysbiosis. Furthermore, the microbial networks of the oropharyngeal microbiota in deceased patients presented the lowest modularity, suggesting a vulnerable community structure. Our data also highlight the critical importance of introducing treatments aimed at enhancing the resilience of the oral cavity microbiome, thereby contributing to better patient outcomes.
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.