Characterization of the gut microbiota in diabetes mellitus II patients with adequate and inadequate metabolic control

The objective of this study was to characterize the composition of the gut microbiota in type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) patients with adequate and inadequate metabolic control, and its relationship with fiber consumption. A total of 26 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) were enrolled, of...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMC research notes 2021-06, Vol.14 (1), p.1-238, Article 238
Hauptverfasser: Hamasaki-Matos, Angie Joyce, Cóndor-Marín, Katherine Marlene, Aquino-Ortega, Ronald, Carrillo-Ng, Hugo, Ugarte-Gil, Cesar, Silva-Caso, Wilmer, Aguilar-Luis, Miguel Angel, del Valle-Mendoza, Juana
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The objective of this study was to characterize the composition of the gut microbiota in type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) patients with adequate and inadequate metabolic control, and its relationship with fiber consumption. A total of 26 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) were enrolled, of which 7 (26.9%) cases had adequate metabolic control (HbA1c < 7%) and 19 (73.1%) inadequate metabolic control (HbA1c [greater than or equai to] 7%). It was observed that among patients with controlled T2DM, 2 (28.6%) cases presented good intake of fiber and 5 (71.4%) cases a regular intake. In contrast, in patients with uncontrolled T2DM, 13 (68.4%) patients reported a regular intake and 6 (31.6%) a poor intake. In relation to the identification of the gut microbiota, both groups presented a similar characterization. There were differences in the population of bacteria identified in both groups, however, the results were not statistically significant. The most frequently identified bacteria in controlled and uncontrolled T2DM patients were Prevotella (71.4% vs 52.6%), followed by Firmicutes (71.4% vs 42.1%), Proteobacteria (71.4% vs 36.8%) and Bacteroidetes (57.1% vs 37.8%). On the other hand, Fusobacterium, Actinobacteria were not identified in either of the two groups of study.
ISSN:1756-0500
1756-0500
DOI:10.1186/s13104-021-05655-z