3.8 Article

Impact of preoperative gastrointestinal microbiota on weight loss after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a pilot study

期刊

POLISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY
卷 94, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

INDEX COPERNICUS INT
DOI: 10.5604/01.3001.0015.7675

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that the composition of oral and gut microbiota is associated with weight loss following LRYGB surgery.
Aim: In recent years the composition of gut microbiome has been linked to the development of several diseases. The aim of the following study was to establish whether it is connected with the outcome of bariatric surgery and analyze theoral and gut microbiota of patients suffering from morbid obesity who underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). Material and methods: The following is a prospective cohort study that was conducted between November 2018 and June 2019. Participants underwent LRYGB surgery. Patients were assigned to group 1 - success (surgical participants who achieved a percentage of excess weight loss [%EWL] >50%), or group 2 (surgical participants who achieved a %EWL <50%). The follow-up to establish %EWL was conducted for 6 months after surgery. Before surgery, oral swabs were obtained, and stool samples were provided. The endpoint was the composition of the gut microbiota. Results: Group 1 consisted of 4 participants; group 2 consisted of 2 participants. No participants were lost to follow-up during the study. Participants in group 1 had an oral microbiota that was enriched with Tissirelia bacteria of the phylum Firmicutes. Gut microbiome of patients in group 1 was enriched with Tannerella of the phylum Bacteroidetes. Group 2 did not present microbiota enriched with any of the analyzed organisms. Gut microbiota was enriched with deltaproteobacteria class (phylum Proteobacteria), bernesiellaceae of the phylum Bacteroidetes. Conclusion: The compositions of the microbiota of the oral cavity and large intestine are related to weight loss achieved following LRYGB.

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

3.8
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