4.7 Article

Colonic Contribution to Uremic Solutes

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY
Volume 22, Issue 9, Pages 1769-1776

Publisher

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.1681/ASN.2010121220

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [DK7357, R21 DK077326, R21 DK084439, R01 GM086884]
  2. National Kidney Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Microbes in the colon produce compounds, normally excreted by the kidneys, which are potential uremic toxins. Although p-cresol sulfate and indoxyl sulfate are well studied examples, few other compounds are known. Here, we compared plasma from hemodialysis patients with and without colons to identify and further characterize colon-derived uremic solutes. HPLC confirmed the colonic origin of p-cresol sulfate and indoxyl sulfate, but levels of hippurate, methylamine, and dimethylamine were not significantly lower in patients without colons. High-resolution mass spectrometry detected more than 1000 features in predialysis plasma samples. Hierarchical clustering based on these features clearly separated dialysis patients with and without colons. Compared with patients with colons, we identified more than 30 individual features in patients without colons that were either absent or present in lower concentration. Almost all of these features were more prominent in plasma from dialysis patients than normal subjects, suggesting that they represented uremic solutes. We used a panel of indole and phenyl standards to identify five colon-derived uremic solutes: a-phenylacetyl-l-glutamine, 5-hydroxyindole, indoxyl glucuronide, p-cresol sulfate, and indoxyl sulfate. However, compounds with accurate mass values matching most of the colon-derived solutes could not be found in standard metabolomic databases. These results suggest that colonic microbes may produce an important portion of uremic solutes, most of which remain unidentified.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available