MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386323664 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0290738

Probiotics: Can it modulate fracture healing?

2023· article· en· W4386323664 on OpenAlexafffund
Yufa Wang, Aouod Agenor, Allison Clement, Adam Hopfgartner, Cari Whyne, Diane Nam

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersSunnybrook Foundation
KeywordsBone healingMedicineBioinformaticsBiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Fractures remain a huge burden and their management adversely affects individuals' function and productivity during the lengthy healing period. Gut microbiota exerts a systemic influence on diverse aspects of host physiology, including bone. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate if oral probiotic treatment before or after a fracture in a mouse model could increase cytokines and biomarkers essential for bone healing with subsequent improvement in the biomechanical properties of the healed callus. METHODS: Femoral osteotomy and intramedullary pinning were performed on C57BL/6 mice. Group 1 received either control PBS or probiotic via oral gavage for 5 weeks before fracture (pre-fracture). Group 2 received equivalent treatments for 4 weeks only after fracture (post-fracture). Fracture calluses were harvested on day 3 and 7 for RT-qPCR to quantify osteogenic-related inflammatory cytokines and bone biomarkers. Fractured femurs were evaluated day 28 post-osteotomy via microstructural analysis (μCT) and biomechanical testing (torsion). RESULTS: Mice treated with probiotics pre-fracture (group 1) showed significantly increased gene expression on day 3 of cytokines TGF-β, IL-6 and IL-17F and a corresponding increase in gene expression on day 7 for Col1 and Runx2. Significant improvement was also seen in bone volume fraction, bone mineral density, tissue mineral density, maximum yield torque, stiffness and strain energy. Mice treated with probiotics post-fracture (group 2), demonstrated no changes in cytokine or bone marker gene expression with no significant changes on microstructural analysis. However, significant increases were seen in twist angle at failure and strain energy, with a corresponding reduction in torsional stiffness. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that oral probiotic administration, before or after a fracture, may sufficiently alter the gut flora microenvironment leading to improved bone healing biomechanical properties. The use of probiotics may provide a cost-effective and low-risk adjunctive therapy to improve fracture healing.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicGut microbiota and health→French-language works237,207→