Cited by 325Gut microbiota and healthLiver Disease and TransplantationOral microbiology and periodontitis research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Salivary microbiota reflects changes in gut microbiota in cirrhosis with hepatic encephalopathy

Open access

Abstract

Altered gut microbiome is associated with systemic inflammation and cirrhosis decompensation. However, the correlation of the oral microbiome with inflammation in cirrhosis is unclear. Our aim was to evaluate the oral microbiome in cirrhosis and compare with stool microbiome. Outpatients with cirrhosis (with/without hepatic encephalopathy [HE]) and controls underwent stool/saliva microbiome analysis (for composition and function) and also systemic inflammatory evaluation. Ninety‐day liver‐related hospitalizations were recorded. Salivary inflammation was studied using T helper 1 cytokines/secretory immunoglobulin A (IgA), histatins and lysozyme in a subsequent group. A total of 102 patients with cirrhosis (43 previous HE) and 32 age‐matched controls were included. On principal component analysis (PCA), stool and saliva microbiome clustered far apart, showing differences between sites as a whole. In salivary microbiome, with previous HE, relative abundance of autochthonous families decreased whereas potentially pathogenic ones (Enterobacteriaceae, Enterococcaceae) increased in saliva. Endotoxin‐related predicted functions were significantly higher in cirrhotic saliva. In stool microbiome, relative autochthonous taxa abundance reduced in previous HE, along with increased Enterobacteriaceae and Enterococcaceae. Cirrhotic stool microbiota demonstrated a significantly higher correlation with systemic inflammation, compared to saliva microbiota, on correlation networks. Thirty‐eight patients were hospitalized within 90 days. Their salivary dysbiosis was significantly worse and predicted this outcome independent of cirrhosis severity. Salivary inflammation was studied in an additional 86 age‐matched subjects (43 controls/43 patients with cirrhosis); significantly higher interleukin (IL)−6/IL‐1β, secretory IgA, and lower lysozyme, and histatins 1 and 5 were found in patients with cirrhosis, compared to controls. Conclusions: Dysbiosis, represented by reduction in autochthonous bacteria, is present in both saliva and stool in patients with cirrhosis, compared to controls. Patients with cirrhosis have impaired salivary defenses and worse inflammation. Salivary dysbiosis was greater in patients with cirrhosis who developed 90‐day hospitalizations. These findings could represent a global mucosal‐immune interface change in cirrhosis. (H epatology 2015;62:1260‐1271)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hep.27819

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 43 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–324 of 324

Metadata

Authors
Bajaj, J. S., Betrapally, N. S., Hylemon, P. B., Heuman, D. M., Daita, K., White, M. B., Unser, A., Thacker, L. R., Sanyal, A. J., Kang, D. J., Sikaroodi, M., & Gillevet, P. M.
Affiliations
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
  • George Mason University (US)
Corresponding author
Bajaj, Jasmohan S.
Venue
Hepatology
Published
2015-05-06
Volume
62
Issue
4
Pages
1260-1271
ISSN
  • 0270-9139 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-3350
OpenAlex
W1518286619
Cited by
325
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 14
FWCI
12.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Hepatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (I01 CX001076)
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01AA020203, RO1AA020203)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK087913)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Hepatology › Liver Disease and Transplantation
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
Keywords
liver cirrhosis, hepatic encephalopathy, salivary microbiota, gut microbiota, dysbiosis, systemic inflammation, Enterobacteriaceae, Enterococcaceae, endotoxin, secretory IgA, histatins, lysozyme, interleukin-6, IL-1β, mucosal immunity, hepatic decompensation
MeSH terms
Gastrointestinal Microbiome, Feces, Female, Hepatic Encephalopathy, Humans, Inflammation, Intestines, Liver Cirrhosis, Male, Middle Aged, Saliva, Microbiota, Dysbiosis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review