Effects of proton pump inhibitor use on the esophageal microbial community.

BACKGROUND: Changes in the esophageal microbiome correlate with esophageal disease, but the effects of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) drugs are incompletely characterized. Our objective was to identify the effects of PPI use on the microbial community of the esophagus. METHODS: Mucosal biopsies of the distal esophagus were analyzed using a customized esophageal microbiome qPCR panel array (EMB). Patient demographics, use of PPIs, duration of use and dose were recorded. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients were included. Mean age was 60.5 years. Ninety percent (52/58) of patients were on PPIs. Mean dose was 42.7 mg. Mean duration of use was 2.5 years. The use of PPIs led to a significant difference in absolute levels of only one organism, Actinomyces, in the entire array (p < 0.01). Among patients who used proton pump inhibitors, there was no significant association between dose and absolute levels of any organism. Similarly, there was no association between duration of use and absolute levels of any organism. CONCLUSIONS: PPI use does not seem to cause significant changes in the distal esophageal microbial community. Future studies with larger sample sizes and esophageal pH testing should be performed to determine the level of acidity and its relationship to the microbial community.

Microbiota Detection Patterns Correlate With Presence and Severity of Barrett's Esophagus.

Background: The microbiome has been increasingly associated with different disease processes, but its role in esophagus is largely unknown. Our goal was to determine the associations of the esophageal microbiota with Barrett's esophagus. Methods: A total of 74 patients were included in this prospective study, including 34 patients with Barrett's esophagus and 40 patients without Barrett's esophagus. Esophageal swabs were obtained from the uvula, and mucosal biopsies were obtained from the proximal esophagus and distal esophagus in each patient. The microbiome of each sample was assessed using a customized Esophageal Microbiome qPCR array (EMB). For each clinical sample, we completed a detection/non-detection analysis for each organism in the EMB. The limit of detection (LOD) for each target was established by analysis of plasmid dilutions. Results: Average age was 60.2 years. There were significantly different microbial detection patterns in patients with Barrett's esophagus compared to the control population. There were a greater number of organisms which had different likelihoods of detection in the distal esophagus, compared to the proximal esophagus or uvula. In addition, as the length of the Barrett's column increased, multiple organisms were less likely to be detected. This decreased likelihood occurred only in the distal esophagus. Beside Barrett's esophagus, no other demographic factors were associated with differences in detection patterns. Conclusions: Microbial community structures differ between patients with and without Barrett's esophagus. Certain organisms are less likely to be detected as the severity of Barrett's esophagus worsens. These results suggest that particular organisms may have a protective effect against the development of Barrett's esophagus.

Microbiota of the Oropharynx and Endoscope Compared to the Esophagus.

The role of the microflora in the development of esophageal disease is still largely unknown and is being investigated in more detail. Our goal was to determine how the microbiota levels of endoscope and uvular swabs compared to the levels of tissue biopsies along various points of the esophagus. 17 patients with Barrett's esophagus agreed to participate in the study. Biopsies of esophageal mucosa were taken from the (1) proximal esophagus, (2) mid-esophagus, (3) distal esophagus, and (4) Barrett's esophagus. Swabs were also taken from the uvula and the endoscope. Throughout the esophagus, 17 bacterial genera were detected from the samples. The microflora pattern obtained from the uvula and endoscopic swabs did not correlate well with mucosal biopsies along any aspect of the esophagus. There were statistically significant differences in the levels and proportions of bacteria found when comparing the uvula swab to the esophageal biopsies and when comparing the endoscope swab to the esophageal biopsies. Obtaining a simple swab of the uvula or endoscope itself appears to be a poor substitute for tissue biopsy of esophageal mucosa when evaluating microflora patterns. When performing microflora studies of the esophagus, mucosal biopsies should be used for analysis.