Does the microbiome play a role in the pathogenesis of colonic diverticular disease? A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The role of the microbiota in diverticulosis and diverticular disease is underexplored. This systematic review aimed to assess all literature pertaining to the microbiota and metabolome associations in asymptomatic diverticulosis, symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease (SUDD), and diverticulitis pathophysiology. METHODS: Seven databases were searched for relevant studies published up to September 28, 2022. Data were screened in Covidence and extracted to Excel. Critical appraisal was undertaken using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale for case/control studies. RESULTS: Of the 413 papers screened by title and abstract, 48 full-text papers were reviewed in detail with 12 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Overall, alpha and beta diversity were unchanged in diverticulosis; however, significant changes in alpha diversity were evident in diverticulitis. A similar Bacteroidetes to Firmicutes ratio compared with controls was reported across studies. The genus-level comparisons showed no relationship with diverticular disease. Butyrate-producing microbial species were decreased in abundance, suggesting a possible contribution to the pathogenesis of diverticular disease. Comamonas species was significantly increased in asymptomatic diverticulosis patients who later developed diverticulitis. Metabolome analysis reported significant differences in diverticulosis and SUDD, with upregulated uracil being the most consistent outcome in both. No significant differences were reported in the mycobiome. CONCLUSION: Overall, there is no convincing evidence of microbial dysbiosis in colonic diverticula to suggest that the microbiota contributes to the pathogenesis of asymptomatic diverticulosis, SUDD, or diverticular disease. Future research investigating microbiota involvement in colonic diverticula should consider an investigation of mucosa-associated microbial changes within the colonic diverticulum itself.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".