FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2055362533> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2055362533 endingPage "1786" @default.
• W2055362533 startingPage "1785" @default.
• W2055362533 abstract "Dear Editor,We thank Dr. Zandstra and colleagues [1] for their interest in our work [2]. Although in their scientific careers they have amassed impressive data on selective digestive microbial decontamination (SDD), they have not fully appreciated what our paper adds to this large body of knowledge.The intestinal microbiota contains many more cells than the human body itself. Furthermore the intestinal microbial gene set is approximately 150 times larger than the human genome [3]. Last year marked the 150th anniversary of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species. How can we explain any genetic advantage for humans to carry so many microbes along? What benefit does our microbiome provide us during health? And what happens during critical illness? How does the intensive care unit (ICU) environment impact on our microbiota? What impact does SDD have on our microbiota? And what is the impact of SDD on the emergence of resistant bacteria in the ICU?Zandstra et al. rightly allude to the fact that Enterobacteriaceae increase during critical illness—we also found a more than tenfold relative increase (as a percentage of total bacteria) compared to data from healthy volunteers [4, 5]. To fight overgrowth of Enterobacteriaceae seems like a good idea—but is there a trade-off? Why did SDD—though providing a small but significant survival advantage compared to a control group—fail to further reduce mortality compared with patients receiving only oral topical antimicrobial products, even though these study participants had similarly increased percentages of Enterobacteriaceae?A potential advantage of having such massive numbers of anaerobic bacteria in the colon is that colonocytes feed on bacterial products. Indeed colonocytes feed on butyrate, produced by a limited number of colonic bacterial species. The Faecalibacterium prausnitzii group is predominant amongst these butyrate-producing groups. This group is already reduced during tube feeding, resulting in a significantly reduced concentration of butyrate [4]. We describe a significant reduction in two groups of microbiota that help in maintaining the integrity of the large intestinal mucosa. Quoting Vollaard’s and Donskey’s work, Zandstra et al. agree that SDD is a contradiction in terms. We apparently disagree in our concern that SDD might have a “dark side”, i.e. that some important beneficial microbiota are harmed by SDD. Besides, there is additional collateral damage: in the analysis of point-prevalence cultures from the de Smet study [6], an increase of intestinal colonisation by resistant organisms was observed after cessation of SDD [7].None of the articles cited by Zandstra et al. describe the use of molecular methods for detection and/or enumeration of the intestinal microbiota. Bacteria from the F. prausnitzii group are highly sensitive to oxygen and require very specific growth media. Culture-based quantification yields a high degree of culture bias. These limitations of culture-based microbiological techniques have precluded reliable testing of the effects of antibiotics (i.e. SDD) on the intestinal microbiota. We are obviously not the first to claim that SDD is not selective. We are, however, the first to back up these claims using absolute numbers of faecal bacteria derived from a quantitatively reliable, molecular method.Referring to Wensinck as an argument that not F. prausnitzii but clostridia contribute to colonisation resistance (CR), Zandstra et al. display a misunderstanding of the composition of the intestinal microbiota. Although phenotypically Gram-negative, F. prausnitzii are genetically closely related to the Gram-positive clostridia Zandstra et al. refer to. In fact, they belong to clostridial cluster IV [8]. These phylogenetic relations have only been discovered since the dawn of the molecular era.We agree that the clinical impact of F. prausnitzii reduction in the critically ill is unclear—at least, that this should be further studied; we do not know whether there is a critical threshold of butyrate substrate for colonocytes to survive, or to maintain the integrity of the large intestinal mucosa. Recent studies have shown an anti-inflammatory effect of F. prausnitzii in Crohn’s disease that could also be beneficial for the critically ill [9]. We have, however, provided novel information that may explain the discrepancy of effective reduction of Enterobacteriaceae by SDD, which fails to translate into further survival benefit in comparison with selective oropharyngeal decontamination (SOD)." @default.
• W2055362533 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2055362533 creator A5000398093 @default.
• W2055362533 creator A5079207076 @default.
• W2055362533 creator A5087697755 @default.
• W2055362533 date "2010-07-07" @default.
• W2055362533 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2055362533 title "SDD: don’t be selective in considering pros and cons" @default.
• W2055362533 cites W1982222331 @default.
• W2055362533 cites W2018054214 @default.
• W2055362533 cites W2065088137 @default.
• W2055362533 cites W2079005986 @default.
• W2055362533 cites W2125826054 @default.
• W2055362533 cites W2141125135 @default.
• W2055362533 cites W2155258759 @default.
• W2055362533 cites W2167730457 @default.
• W2055362533 doi "https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-010-1947-9" @default.
• W2055362533 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/2940012" @default.
• W2055362533 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20607516" @default.
• W2055362533 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W2055362533 type Work @default.
• W2055362533 sameAs 2055362533 @default.
• W2055362533 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2055362533 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2055362533 hasAuthorship W2055362533A5000398093 @default.
• W2055362533 hasAuthorship W2055362533A5079207076 @default.
• W2055362533 hasAuthorship W2055362533A5087697755 @default.
• W2055362533 hasBestOaLocation W20553625331 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConcept C177713679 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConcept C199360897 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConcept C2779526319 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConcept C2991975920 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConcept C37091826 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConcept C42219234 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConceptScore W2055362533C177713679 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConceptScore W2055362533C199360897 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConceptScore W2055362533C2779526319 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConceptScore W2055362533C2991975920 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConceptScore W2055362533C37091826 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConceptScore W2055362533C41008148 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConceptScore W2055362533C42219234 @default.
• W2055362533 hasConceptScore W2055362533C71924100 @default.
• W2055362533 hasIssue "10" @default.
• W2055362533 hasLocation W20553625331 @default.
• W2055362533 hasLocation W20553625332 @default.
• W2055362533 hasLocation W20553625333 @default.
• W2055362533 hasLocation W20553625334 @default.
• W2055362533 hasLocation W20553625335 @default.
• W2055362533 hasOpenAccess W2055362533 @default.
• W2055362533 hasPrimaryLocation W20553625331 @default.
• W2055362533 hasRelatedWork W1979404825 @default.
• W2055362533 hasRelatedWork W2013403198 @default.
• W2055362533 hasRelatedWork W2063036856 @default.
• W2055362533 hasRelatedWork W2255877608 @default.
• W2055362533 hasRelatedWork W2462769551 @default.
• W2055362533 hasRelatedWork W2923463259 @default.
• W2055362533 hasRelatedWork W2927671423 @default.
• W2055362533 hasRelatedWork W2967343934 @default.
• W2055362533 hasRelatedWork W3132436955 @default.
• W2055362533 hasRelatedWork W3212096689 @default.
• W2055362533 hasVolume "36" @default.
• W2055362533 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2055362533 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2055362533 magId "2055362533" @default.
• W2055362533 workType "article" @default.