↓ Skip to main content

Microbiome and Culture Based Analysis of Chronic Rhinosinusitis Compared to Healthy Sinus Mucosa

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Microbiome and Culture Based Analysis of Chronic Rhinosinusitis Compared to Healthy Sinus Mucosa
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, April 2018
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00643
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kerstin Koeller, Daniel P. R. Herlemann, Tobias Schuldt, Attila Ovari, Ellen Guder, Andreas Podbielski, Bernd Kreikemeyer, Bernhard Olzowy

Abstract

The role of bacteria in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is still not well understood. Whole microbiome analysis adds new aspects to our current understanding that is mainly based on isolated bacteria. It is still unclear how the results of microbiome analysis and the classical culture based approaches interrelate. To address this, middle meatus swabs and tissue samples were obtained during sinus surgery in 5 patients with CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), 5 patients with diffuse CRS without nasal polyps (CRSsNP), 5 patients with unilateral purulent maxillary CRS (upm CRS) and 3 patients with healthy sinus mucosa. Swabs were cultured, and associated bacteria were identified. Additionally, parts of each tissue sample also underwent culture approaches, and in parallel DNA was extracted for 16S rRNA gene amplicon-based microbiome analysis. From tissue samples 4.2 ± 1.2 distinct species per patient were cultured, from swabs 5.4 ± 1.6. The most frequently cultured species from the swabs were Propionibacterium acnes, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Corynebacterium spp. and Staphylococcus aureus. The 16S-RNA gene analysis revealed no clear differentiation of the bacterial community of healthy compared to CRS samples of unilateral purulent maxillary CRS and CRSwNP. However, the bacterial community of CRSsNP differed significantly from the healthy controls. In the CRSsNP samples Flavobacterium, Pseudomonas, Pedobacter, Porphyromonas, Stenotrophomonas, and Brevundimonas were significantly enriched compared to the healthy controls. Species isolated from culture did not generally correspond with the most abundant genera in microbiome analysis. Only Fusobacteria, Parvimonas, and Prevotella found in 2 unilateral purulent maxillary CRS samples by the cultivation dependent approach were also found in the cultivation independent approach in high abundance, suggesting a classic infectious pathogenesis of odontogenic origin in these two specific cases. Alterations of the bacterial community might be a more crucial factor for the development of CRSsNP compared to CRSwNP. Further studies are needed to investigate the relation between bacterial community characteristics and the development of CRSsNP.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 20 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 6%
Unspecified 3 5%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 22 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 15 May 2018.
All research outputs
#18,610,562
of 23,053,169 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#19,611
of 25,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,818
of 327,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#469
of 605 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,053,169 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,200 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 327,039 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 605 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.