↓ Skip to main content

Microbial Communities of Conducting and Respiratory Zones of Lung-Transplanted Patients

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Microbial Communities of Conducting and Respiratory Zones of Lung-Transplanted Patients
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01749
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie Beaume, Vladimir Lazarevic, Thilo Köhler, Nadia Gaïa, Oriol Manuel, John-David Aubert, Loïc Baerlocher, Laurent Farinelli, Paola Gasche, Jacques Schrenzel, Christian van Delden, the Swiss Transplant Cohort Study, Rita Achermann, Patrizia Amico, John-David Aubert, Philippe Baumann, Guido Beldi, Christian Benden, Christoph Berger, Isabelle Binet, Pierre-Yves Bochud, Elsa Boely, Heiner Bucher, Leo Bühler, Thierry Carell, Emmanuelle Catana, Yves Chalandon, Sabina de Geest, Olivier de Rougemont, Michael Dickenmann, Michel Duchosal, Thomas Fehr, Sylvie Ferrari-Lacraz, Christian Garzoni, Paola G. Soccal, Emiliano Giostra, Déla Golshayan, Daniel Good, Karine Hadaya, Jörg Halter, Dominik Heim, Christoph Hess, Sven Hillinger, Hans H. Hirsch, Cédric Hirzel, Günther Hofbauer, Uyen Huynh-Do, Franz Immer, Richard Klaghofer, Michael Koller, Bettina Laesser, Roger Lehmann, Christian Lovis, Oriol Manuel, Hans-Peter Marti, Pierre Y. Martin, Luca Martinolli, Pascal Meylan, Paul Mohacsi, Isabelle Morard, Philippe Morel, Ulrike Mueller, Nicolas J. Mueller, Helen Mueller-McKenna, Antonia Müller, Thomas Müller, Beat Müllhaupt, David Nadal, Manuel Pascual, Jakob Passweg, Chantal P. Ziegler, Juliane Rick, Eddy Roosnek, Anne Rosselet, Silvia Rothlin, Frank Ruschitzka, Urs Schanz, Stefan Schaub, Christian Seiler, Susanne Stampf, Jürg Steiger, Guido Stirnimann, Guido Toso, Dimitri Tsinalis, Christian Van Delden, Jean-Pierre Venetz, Jean Villard, Madeleine Wick, Markus Wilhelm, Patrick Yerly

Abstract

Background: Lung transplantation (LT) is a recognized treatment for end-stage pulmonary disease. Bacteria from the recipient nasopharynx seed the new lungs leading to infections and allograft damage. Understanding the characteristics and topological variations of the microbiota may be important to apprehend the pathophysiology of allograft dysfunction. Objectives: To examine the characteristics and relationship of bacterial compositions between conducting and respiratory zones of the allograft. Methods: We performed 16S rRNA gene sequencing on bronchial aspirates (BAs) and bronchoalveolar lavages (BALs) collected in pairs in 19 patients at several time-points post-LT. Results: The respiratory zone was characterized independently of the time post-LT by a higher bacterial richness than the conducting zone (p = 0.041). The phyla Firmicutes and Proteobacteria dominated both sampling zones, with an inverse correlation between these two phyla (Spearman r = -0.830). Samples of the same pair, as well as pairs from the same individual clustered together (Pseudo-F = 3.8652, p < 0.01). Microbiota of BA and BAL were more closely related in samples from the same patient than each sample type across different patients, with variation in community structure being mainly inter-individual (p < 0.01). Both number of antibiotics administered (p < 0.01) and time interval post-LT (p < 0.01) contributed to the variation in global microbiota structure. Longitudinal analysis of BA-BAL pairs of two patients showed dynamic wave like fluctuations of the microbiota. Conclusions: Our results show that post-transplant respiratory zones harbor higher bacterial richness, but overall similar bacterial profiles as compared to conductive zones. They further support an individual microbial signature following LT.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 19%
Researcher 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Other 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 11 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 10 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 13 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 October 2016.
All research outputs
#4,194,118
of 24,885,505 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#3,941
of 28,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,276
of 318,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#102
of 429 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,885,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 28,434 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 318,999 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 429 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.