4.6 Article

The changes of gut microbiota after acute myocardial infarction in rats

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 12, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180717

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81470473, 81270274]
  2. Beijing Science and Technology Major Project [D141100003014002]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent studies suggested that gut microbiota was involved in the development of coronary artery disease. However, the changes of gut microbiota following acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remain unknown. In this study, a total of 66 male Wistar rats were randomly divided into control, AMI and SHAM groups. The controls (n = 6) were sacrificed after anesthesia. The AMI model was built by ligation of left anterior descending coronary artery. The rats of AMI and SHAM groups were sacrificed at 12 h, 1 d, 3 d, 7 d and 14 d post-operation respectively. Gut microbiota was analyzed by 16S rDNA high throughput sequencing. The gut barrier injuries were evaluated through histopathology, transmission electron microscope and immunohistochemical staining. The richness of gut microbiota was significantly higher in AMI group than SHAM group at 7 d after AMI (P<0.05). Principal coordinate analysis with unweighted UniFrac distances revealed microbial differences between AMI and SHAM groups at 7 d. The gut barrier impairment was also the most significant at 7 d post-AMI. We further identified the differences of microorganisms between AMI and SHAM group at 7 d. The abundance of Synergistetes phylum, Spirochaetes phylum, Lachnospiraceae family, Syntrophomonadaceae family and Tissierella Soehngenia genus was higher in AMI group compared with SHAM group at 7 d post-operation (q<0.05). Our study showed the changes of gut microbiota at day 7 post AMI which was paralleled with intestinal barrier impairment. We also identified the microbial organisms that contribute most.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available