4.8 Article

High prevalence of Escherichia coli belonging to the B2+D phylogenetic group in inflammatory bowel disease

Journal

GUT
Volume 56, Issue 5, Pages 669-675

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/gut.2006.099796

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: It is not clear which species of bacteria may be involved in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). One way of determining which bacteria might be likely candidates is to use culture-independent methods to identify microorganisms that are present in diseased tissues but not in controls. Aims: (1) To assess the diversity of microbial communities of biopsy tissue using culture-independent methods; (2) to culture the bacteria found in the tissues of patients with IBD but not in the controls; (3) to identify potential virulence factors associated with cultured bacteria. Methods: 84 biopsy specimens were collected from 15 controls, 13 patients with Crohn's disease (CD) and 19 patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) from a population-based case-control study. Ribosomal intergenic spacer analysis (RISA) was conducted to identify unique DNA bands in tissues from patients with CD and UC that did not appear in controls. Results: RISA followed by DNA sequencing identified unique bands in biopsy specimens from patients with IBD that were classified as Escherichia coli. Targeted culture showed a significantly (p < 0.05) higher number of Enterobacteriaceae in specimens from patients with IBD. The B2+D phylogenetic group, serine protease autotransporters (SPATE) and adherence factors were more likely to be associated with tissues from patients with UC and CD than with controls. Conclusions: The abundance of Enterobacteriaceae is 3-4 logs higher in tissues of patients with IBD and the B2+D phylogenetic groups are more prevalent in patients with UC and CD. The B2+D phylogenetic groups are associated with SPATE and adherence factors and may have a significant role in disease aetiology.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available