• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Alpha-diversity and microbial community structure of the male urinary microbiota depend on urine sampling method

J. Hrbacek, D. Morais, P. Cermak, V. Hanacek, R. Zachoval

. 2021 ; 11 (1) : 23758. [pub] 20211209

Jazyk angličtina Země Velká Británie

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc22011727

Considerable variation exists in the methodology of urinary microbiota studies published so far including the cornerstone of any biomedical analysis: sample collection. The aim of this study was to compare the urinary microbiota of first-catch voided urine (FCU), mid-stream voided urine (MSU) and aseptically catheterised urine in men and define the most suitable urine sampling method. Forty-nine men (mean age 71.3 years) undergoing endoscopic urological procedures were enrolled in the study. Each of them contributed three samples: first-catch urine (FCU), mid-stream urine (MSU) and a catheterised urine sample. The samples were subjected to next-generation sequencing (NGS, n = 35) and expanded quantitative urine culture (EQUC, n = 31). Using NGS, Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, and Proteobacteria were the most abundant phyla in our population. The most abundant genera (in order of relative abundance) included: Prevotella, Veillonella, Streptococcus, Porphyromonas, Campylobacter, Pseudomonas, Staphylococcus, Ezakiella, Escherichia and Dialister. Eighty-two of 105 samples were dominated by a single genus. FCU, MSU and catheterised urine samples differed significantly in three of five alpha-diversity measures (ANOVA, p < 0.05): estimated number of operational taxonomic units, Chao1 and abundance-based coverage estimators. Beta-diversity comparisons using the PIME method (Prevalence Interval for Microbiome Evaluation) resulted in clustering of urine samples according to the mode of sampling. EQUC detected cultivable bacteria in 30/31 (97%) FCU and 27/31 (87%) MSU samples. Only 4/31 (13%) of catheterised urine samples showed bacterial growth. Urine samples obtained by transurethral catheterisation under aseptic conditions seem to differ from spontaneously voided urine samples. Whether the added value of a more exact reflection of the bladder microbiota free from urethral contamination outweighs the invasiveness of urethral catheterisation remains to be determined.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22011727
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20220506131130.0
007      
ta
008      
220425s2021 xxk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1038/s41598-021-03292-x $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)34887510
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxk
100    1_
$a Hrbacek, Jan $u Department of Urology, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Thomayer University Hospital, Videnska 800, 14059, Prague, Czech Republic. honzahrbacek@gmail.com
245    10
$a Alpha-diversity and microbial community structure of the male urinary microbiota depend on urine sampling method / $c J. Hrbacek, D. Morais, P. Cermak, V. Hanacek, R. Zachoval
520    9_
$a Considerable variation exists in the methodology of urinary microbiota studies published so far including the cornerstone of any biomedical analysis: sample collection. The aim of this study was to compare the urinary microbiota of first-catch voided urine (FCU), mid-stream voided urine (MSU) and aseptically catheterised urine in men and define the most suitable urine sampling method. Forty-nine men (mean age 71.3 years) undergoing endoscopic urological procedures were enrolled in the study. Each of them contributed three samples: first-catch urine (FCU), mid-stream urine (MSU) and a catheterised urine sample. The samples were subjected to next-generation sequencing (NGS, n = 35) and expanded quantitative urine culture (EQUC, n = 31). Using NGS, Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, and Proteobacteria were the most abundant phyla in our population. The most abundant genera (in order of relative abundance) included: Prevotella, Veillonella, Streptococcus, Porphyromonas, Campylobacter, Pseudomonas, Staphylococcus, Ezakiella, Escherichia and Dialister. Eighty-two of 105 samples were dominated by a single genus. FCU, MSU and catheterised urine samples differed significantly in three of five alpha-diversity measures (ANOVA, p < 0.05): estimated number of operational taxonomic units, Chao1 and abundance-based coverage estimators. Beta-diversity comparisons using the PIME method (Prevalence Interval for Microbiome Evaluation) resulted in clustering of urine samples according to the mode of sampling. EQUC detected cultivable bacteria in 30/31 (97%) FCU and 27/31 (87%) MSU samples. Only 4/31 (13%) of catheterised urine samples showed bacterial growth. Urine samples obtained by transurethral catheterisation under aseptic conditions seem to differ from spontaneously voided urine samples. Whether the added value of a more exact reflection of the bladder microbiota free from urethral contamination outweighs the invasiveness of urethral catheterisation remains to be determined.
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    12
$a biodiverzita $7 D044822
650    _2
$a komorbidita $7 D015897
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a metagenomika $x metody $7 D056186
650    12
$a mikrobiota $7 D064307
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a analýza moči $7 D016482
650    _2
$a močové ústrojí $x mikrobiologie $7 D014551
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Morais, Daniel $u Laboratory of Environmental Microbiology, Institute of Microbiology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Videnska 1083, 14200, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Cermak, Pavel $u Department of Clinical Microbiology, Thomayer University Hospital, Videnska 800, 14059, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Hanacek, Vitezslav $u Department of Urology, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Thomayer University Hospital, Videnska 800, 14059, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Zachoval, Roman $u Department of Urology, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Thomayer University Hospital, Videnska 800, 14059, Prague, Czech Republic
773    0_
$w MED00182195 $t Scientific reports $x 2045-2322 $g Roč. 11, č. 1 (2021), s. 23758
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34887510 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20220425 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20220506131122 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1789360 $s 1162925
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2021 $b 11 $c 1 $d 23758 $e 20211209 $i 2045-2322 $m Scientific reports $n Sci Rep $x MED00182195
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20220425

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...