4.7 Article

Mechanistic Study of Coffee Effects on Gut Microbiota and Motility in Rats

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 14, 期 22, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu14224877

关键词

coffee; small intestine; colon; microbiota; motility; smooth muscle

资金

  1. National Institute of Health [R01 DK102811, R01 DK124611]
  2. U.S. Department of Defense [W81XWH2010681]
  3. U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) [W81XWH2010681] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Defense (DOD)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The consumption of coffee has been found to be beneficial for postoperative ileus. This study investigated the mechanisms behind these benefits and found that coffee stimulates gut smooth muscle contractions and inhibits gut microbiota.
Consumption of coffee has benefits in postoperative ileus. We tested the hypothesis that the benefits may be related to the effects of coffee on gut microbiota and motility and studied the mechanisms of action in rats. The in vitro and in vivo effects of regular and decaffeinated (decaf) coffee on gut microbiota of the ileum and colon were determined by bacterial culture and quantitative RT-PCR. Ileal and colonic smooth muscle contractility was determined in a muscle bath. In the in vivo studies, coffee solution (1 g/kg) was administered by oral gavage daily for 3 days. Compared to regular LB agar, the growth of microbiota in the colon and ileal contents was significantly suppressed in LB agar containing coffee or decaf (1.5% or 3%). Treatment with coffee or decaf in vivo for 3 days suppressed gut microbiota but did not significantly affect gut motility or smooth muscle contractility. However, coffee or decaf dose-dependently caused ileal and colonic muscle contractions in vitro. A mechanistic study found that compound(s) other than caffeine contracted gut smooth muscle in a muscarinic receptor-dependent manner. In conclusion, coffee stimulates gut smooth muscle contractions via a muscarinic receptor-dependent mechanism and inhibits microbiota in a caffeine-independent manner.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据