用于新一代基因测序分析的根管微生物群体内取样方法研究。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
David Donnermeyer, Johannes Matern, Karola Prior, Madgalena Ibing, Daniel Hagenfeld, Edgar Schäfer, Sebastian Bürklein, Dag Harmsen, Benjamin Ehmke
{"title":"用于新一代基因测序分析的根管微生物群体内取样方法研究。","authors":"David Donnermeyer, Johannes Matern, Karola Prior, Madgalena Ibing, Daniel Hagenfeld, Edgar Schäfer, Sebastian Bürklein, Dag Harmsen, Benjamin Ehmke","doi":"10.1016/j.joen.2024.11.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The aim was to evaluate the suitability of paper points or endodontic nickel-titanium files to sample microorganisms for in vivo investigation of endodontic microbiota by 16S rDNA sequencing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>45 patients presenting clinical and radiological sings of apical periodontitis were recruited for sampling, giving their written informed consent. Glide paths were assessed using C-Pilot Files and K-Files under electronic root canal length control under aseptic conditions. Microbial samples were taken from 84 root canals in duplicates, the first sample with a sterile paper point (size 15), the second with a sterile file (size 20/.06). After DNA extraction, the hypervariable region V4 of the bacterial 16 S rRNA gene was amplified and sequenced (Illumina MiSeq). Sequencing data were trimmed with Cutadapt and exact amplicon sequence variants generated by DADA2. Taxonomy was assigned based on the Human Oral Microbiome Database (eHOMD). Statistical analysis of diversity parameters comprised Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and PERMANOVA. Compositional differences were evaluated by differential abundance analysis (DESeq2). Microbial contamination during the sampling process and analysis were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Concerning alpha diversity, richness and dissimilarity differed non-significantly between paper point and instrument samples (P>.05) while a significant difference was observed in Shannon Index (P<.05). Regarding beta diversity, paper point and instrument samples presented with similar microbial community compositions (P=1.0,PERMANOVA). Paper point controls contained significantly higher proportions of Pseudomonadales (P<.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Paper point and endodontic instrument sampling generate valid specimens for 16S rDNA community profiling. Endodontic instrument sampling is easier to execute and therefore, could be the technique of choice.</p>","PeriodicalId":15703,"journal":{"name":"Journal of endodontics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A methodological study on microbial in vivo sampling methods of root canal microbiota for next generation gene sequencing analysis.\",\"authors\":\"David Donnermeyer, Johannes Matern, Karola Prior, Madgalena Ibing, Daniel Hagenfeld, Edgar Schäfer, Sebastian Bürklein, Dag Harmsen, Benjamin Ehmke\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.joen.2024.11.007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The aim was to evaluate the suitability of paper points or endodontic nickel-titanium files to sample microorganisms for in vivo investigation of endodontic microbiota by 16S rDNA sequencing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>45 patients presenting clinical and radiological sings of apical periodontitis were recruited for sampling, giving their written informed consent. Glide paths were assessed using C-Pilot Files and K-Files under electronic root canal length control under aseptic conditions. Microbial samples were taken from 84 root canals in duplicates, the first sample with a sterile paper point (size 15), the second with a sterile file (size 20/.06). After DNA extraction, the hypervariable region V4 of the bacterial 16 S rRNA gene was amplified and sequenced (Illumina MiSeq). Sequencing data were trimmed with Cutadapt and exact amplicon sequence variants generated by DADA2. Taxonomy was assigned based on the Human Oral Microbiome Database (eHOMD). Statistical analysis of diversity parameters comprised Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and PERMANOVA. Compositional differences were evaluated by differential abundance analysis (DESeq2). Microbial contamination during the sampling process and analysis were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Concerning alpha diversity, richness and dissimilarity differed non-significantly between paper point and instrument samples (P>.05) while a significant difference was observed in Shannon Index (P<.05). Regarding beta diversity, paper point and instrument samples presented with similar microbial community compositions (P=1.0,PERMANOVA). Paper point controls contained significantly higher proportions of Pseudomonadales (P<.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Paper point and endodontic instrument sampling generate valid specimens for 16S rDNA community profiling. Endodontic instrument sampling is easier to execute and therefore, could be the technique of choice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15703,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of endodontics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of endodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2024.11.007\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of endodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2024.11.007","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:目的是评估纸点或根管镍钛锉采样微生物的适用性,以便通过 16S rDNA 测序对根管微生物群进行活体研究。方法:招募了 45 名临床和放射学表现为根尖牙周炎的患者,在他们的书面知情同意下进行采样。在无菌条件下,使用电子根管长度控制下的 C-Pilot Files 和 K-Files 评估滑行路径。从 84 个根管中重复采集微生物样本,第一个样本使用无菌纸点(15 号),第二个样本使用无菌锉(20/.06 号)。提取 DNA 后,扩增细菌 16 S rRNA 基因的 V4 超变区并进行测序(Illumina MiSeq)。用 Cutadapt 对测序数据进行修剪,并用 DADA2 生成精确的扩增子序列变异。根据人类口腔微生物组数据库(eHOMD)进行分类。多样性参数的统计分析包括 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验和 PERMANOVA。组成差异通过差异丰度分析(DESeq2)进行评估。对采样和分析过程中的微生物污染进行了评估:关于α多样性,纸点样本和牙髓器械样本的丰富度和相似度差异不显著(P>.05),而香农指数(PConclusions)差异显著:纸点取样和根管治疗器械取样都能产生用于 16S rDNA 群落分析的有效标本。牙髓器械取样更容易执行,因此可以作为首选技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A methodological study on microbial in vivo sampling methods of root canal microbiota for next generation gene sequencing analysis.

Introduction: The aim was to evaluate the suitability of paper points or endodontic nickel-titanium files to sample microorganisms for in vivo investigation of endodontic microbiota by 16S rDNA sequencing.

Methods: 45 patients presenting clinical and radiological sings of apical periodontitis were recruited for sampling, giving their written informed consent. Glide paths were assessed using C-Pilot Files and K-Files under electronic root canal length control under aseptic conditions. Microbial samples were taken from 84 root canals in duplicates, the first sample with a sterile paper point (size 15), the second with a sterile file (size 20/.06). After DNA extraction, the hypervariable region V4 of the bacterial 16 S rRNA gene was amplified and sequenced (Illumina MiSeq). Sequencing data were trimmed with Cutadapt and exact amplicon sequence variants generated by DADA2. Taxonomy was assigned based on the Human Oral Microbiome Database (eHOMD). Statistical analysis of diversity parameters comprised Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and PERMANOVA. Compositional differences were evaluated by differential abundance analysis (DESeq2). Microbial contamination during the sampling process and analysis were evaluated.

Results: Concerning alpha diversity, richness and dissimilarity differed non-significantly between paper point and instrument samples (P>.05) while a significant difference was observed in Shannon Index (P<.05). Regarding beta diversity, paper point and instrument samples presented with similar microbial community compositions (P=1.0,PERMANOVA). Paper point controls contained significantly higher proportions of Pseudomonadales (P<.05).

Conclusions: Paper point and endodontic instrument sampling generate valid specimens for 16S rDNA community profiling. Endodontic instrument sampling is easier to execute and therefore, could be the technique of choice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of endodontics
Journal of endodontics 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
224
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Endodontics, the official journal of the American Association of Endodontists, publishes scientific articles, case reports and comparison studies evaluating materials and methods of pulp conservation and endodontic treatment. Endodontists and general dentists can learn about new concepts in root canal treatment and the latest advances in techniques and instrumentation in the one journal that helps them keep pace with rapid changes in this field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信