Cargando…

Washed microbiota transplantation vs. manual fecal microbiota transplantation: clinical findings, animal studies and in vitro screening

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) by manual preparation has been applied to treat diseases for thousands of years. However, this method still endures safety risks and challenges the psychological endurance and acceptance of doctors, patients and donors. Population evidence showed the washed mic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Ting, Lu, Gaochen, Zhao, Zhe, Liu, Yafei, Shen, Quan, Li, Pan, Chen, Yaoyao, Yin, Haoran, Wang, Huiquan, Marcella, Cicilia, Cui, Bota, Cheng, Lei, Ji, Guozhong, Zhang, Faming
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Higher Education Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7093410/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31919742
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13238-019-00684-8
_version_ 1783510277836242944
author Zhang, Ting
Lu, Gaochen
Zhao, Zhe
Liu, Yafei
Shen, Quan
Li, Pan
Chen, Yaoyao
Yin, Haoran
Wang, Huiquan
Marcella, Cicilia
Cui, Bota
Cheng, Lei
Ji, Guozhong
Zhang, Faming
author_facet Zhang, Ting
Lu, Gaochen
Zhao, Zhe
Liu, Yafei
Shen, Quan
Li, Pan
Chen, Yaoyao
Yin, Haoran
Wang, Huiquan
Marcella, Cicilia
Cui, Bota
Cheng, Lei
Ji, Guozhong
Zhang, Faming
author_sort Zhang, Ting
collection PubMed
description Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) by manual preparation has been applied to treat diseases for thousands of years. However, this method still endures safety risks and challenges the psychological endurance and acceptance of doctors, patients and donors. Population evidence showed the washed microbiota preparation with microfiltration based on an automatic purification system followed by repeated centrifugation plus suspension for three times significantly reduced FMT-related adverse events. This washing preparation makes delivering a precise dose of the enriched microbiota feasible, instead of using the weight of stool. Intraperitoneal injection in mice with the fecal microbiota supernatant obtained after repeated centrifugation plus suspension for three times induced less toxic reaction than that by the first centrifugation following the microfiltration. The toxic reactions that include death, the change in the level of peripheral white blood cells, and the proliferation of germinal center in secondary lymphoid follicles in spleen were noted. The metagenomic next-generation sequencing (NGS) indicated the increasing types and amount of viruses could be washed out during the washing process. Metabolomics analysis indicated metabolites with pro-inflammatory effects in the fecal microbiota supernatant such as leukotriene B4, corticosterone, and prostaglandin G2 could be removed by repeated washing. Near-infrared absorption spectroscopy could be served as a rapid detection method to control the quality of the washing-process. In conclusion, this study for the first time provides evidence linking clinical findings and animal experiments to support that washed microbiota transplantation (WMT) is safer, more precise and more quality-controllable than the crude FMT by manual. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s13238-019-00684-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7093410
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Higher Education Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70934102020-03-26 Washed microbiota transplantation vs. manual fecal microbiota transplantation: clinical findings, animal studies and in vitro screening Zhang, Ting Lu, Gaochen Zhao, Zhe Liu, Yafei Shen, Quan Li, Pan Chen, Yaoyao Yin, Haoran Wang, Huiquan Marcella, Cicilia Cui, Bota Cheng, Lei Ji, Guozhong Zhang, Faming Protein Cell Research Article Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) by manual preparation has been applied to treat diseases for thousands of years. However, this method still endures safety risks and challenges the psychological endurance and acceptance of doctors, patients and donors. Population evidence showed the washed microbiota preparation with microfiltration based on an automatic purification system followed by repeated centrifugation plus suspension for three times significantly reduced FMT-related adverse events. This washing preparation makes delivering a precise dose of the enriched microbiota feasible, instead of using the weight of stool. Intraperitoneal injection in mice with the fecal microbiota supernatant obtained after repeated centrifugation plus suspension for three times induced less toxic reaction than that by the first centrifugation following the microfiltration. The toxic reactions that include death, the change in the level of peripheral white blood cells, and the proliferation of germinal center in secondary lymphoid follicles in spleen were noted. The metagenomic next-generation sequencing (NGS) indicated the increasing types and amount of viruses could be washed out during the washing process. Metabolomics analysis indicated metabolites with pro-inflammatory effects in the fecal microbiota supernatant such as leukotriene B4, corticosterone, and prostaglandin G2 could be removed by repeated washing. Near-infrared absorption spectroscopy could be served as a rapid detection method to control the quality of the washing-process. In conclusion, this study for the first time provides evidence linking clinical findings and animal experiments to support that washed microbiota transplantation (WMT) is safer, more precise and more quality-controllable than the crude FMT by manual. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s13238-019-00684-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Higher Education Press 2020-01-09 2020-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7093410/ /pubmed/31919742 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13238-019-00684-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Research Article
Zhang, Ting
Lu, Gaochen
Zhao, Zhe
Liu, Yafei
Shen, Quan
Li, Pan
Chen, Yaoyao
Yin, Haoran
Wang, Huiquan
Marcella, Cicilia
Cui, Bota
Cheng, Lei
Ji, Guozhong
Zhang, Faming
Washed microbiota transplantation vs. manual fecal microbiota transplantation: clinical findings, animal studies and in vitro screening
title Washed microbiota transplantation vs. manual fecal microbiota transplantation: clinical findings, animal studies and in vitro screening
title_full Washed microbiota transplantation vs. manual fecal microbiota transplantation: clinical findings, animal studies and in vitro screening
title_fullStr Washed microbiota transplantation vs. manual fecal microbiota transplantation: clinical findings, animal studies and in vitro screening
title_full_unstemmed Washed microbiota transplantation vs. manual fecal microbiota transplantation: clinical findings, animal studies and in vitro screening
title_short Washed microbiota transplantation vs. manual fecal microbiota transplantation: clinical findings, animal studies and in vitro screening
title_sort washed microbiota transplantation vs. manual fecal microbiota transplantation: clinical findings, animal studies and in vitro screening
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7093410/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31919742
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13238-019-00684-8
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangting washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT lugaochen washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT zhaozhe washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT liuyafei washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT shenquan washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT lipan washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT chenyaoyao washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT yinhaoran washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT wanghuiquan washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT marcellacicilia washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT cuibota washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT chenglei washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT jiguozhong washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening
AT zhangfaming washedmicrobiotatransplantationvsmanualfecalmicrobiotatransplantationclinicalfindingsanimalstudiesandinvitroscreening