Role of Intestinal Microbiota in Ulcerative Colitis
Role of Intestinal Microbiota in Ulcerative Colitis
Role of Intestinal Microbiota in Ulcerative Colitis
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
[60], colonic tissue [46] or cell l<strong>in</strong>es [31]. However, they <strong>of</strong>ten only provide short‐term <strong>in</strong>formation<br />
regard<strong>in</strong>g axenic cultures and tend to ignore the microbial <strong>in</strong>teraction between and with<strong>in</strong> the<br />
lum<strong>in</strong>al and mucosal microbiota.<br />
Only recently, a dynamic <strong>in</strong> vitro gut model has been developed which simulates both the lum<strong>in</strong>al<br />
and mucosal environment [61]. This model, named the M‐SHIME was adapted from the validated<br />
Simulator <strong>of</strong> the Human <strong>Intest<strong>in</strong>al</strong> Microbial Ecosystem (SHIME) [59], and hence allows study<strong>in</strong>g<br />
the mucosal microbiota and <strong>in</strong>teraction between lum<strong>in</strong>al and mucosal microbial communities.<br />
The aim <strong>of</strong> this study was to <strong>in</strong>vestigate the ability <strong>of</strong> fecal microbiota from healthy subjects and<br />
UC patients <strong>in</strong> either remission or relapse to colonize the artificial mucus layer <strong>of</strong> the M‐SHIME.<br />
Denatur<strong>in</strong>g Gradient Gel Electrophoresis (DGGE) and quantitative Real‐Time PCR (qPCR), both <strong>of</strong><br />
which are culture‐<strong>in</strong>dependent methods, were applied. DGGE was used to obta<strong>in</strong> f<strong>in</strong>gerpr<strong>in</strong>ts <strong>of</strong><br />
the total microbiota <strong>of</strong> the three groups after colonization <strong>in</strong> the M‐SHIME, while qPCR was used<br />
to quantify a broad range <strong>of</strong> selected bacteria taxa presumed to play a role <strong>in</strong> the homeostasis <strong>of</strong><br />
the colonic microbial ecosystem.<br />
Materials and Methods<br />
Human volunteers and cl<strong>in</strong>ical characteristics <strong>of</strong> the UC patients<br />
Fecal samples were obta<strong>in</strong>ed from 8 patients with UC and 4 healthy controls. With<strong>in</strong> the UC group,<br />
4 patients were <strong>in</strong> cl<strong>in</strong>ical remission and 4 patients had active disease at the time <strong>of</strong> sampl<strong>in</strong>g<br />
accord<strong>in</strong>g to cl<strong>in</strong>ical and endoscopical criteria [6]. The patients were previously diagnosed with UC<br />
accord<strong>in</strong>g to standardized diagnostic criteria at the Department <strong>of</strong> Gastroenterology, Herlev<br />
Hospital [30]. The study was performed <strong>in</strong> accordance with the Second Hels<strong>in</strong>ki Declaration,<br />
reported to the Danish Data Protection Agency and approved by the Regional Ethics Committee.<br />
Written, <strong>in</strong>formed consent was obta<strong>in</strong>ed from each participant under a protocol approved by the<br />
Danish National Committee on Biomedical Research Ethics. UC patients received mesalaz<strong>in</strong>e (anti‐<br />
<strong>in</strong>flammatory drug) and azathiopr<strong>in</strong>e (immunosuppressive drug). One <strong>of</strong> the patients had active<br />
pancolitis, one other had active left‐sided colitis and the rest had either active proctitis or<br />
proctosigmoiditis. None <strong>of</strong> the participants had been treated with antibiotics for at least 2 months<br />
4