Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Feb;98(7):e14513.
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000014513.

Alterations in fecal short-chain fatty acids in patients with irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Alterations in fecal short-chain fatty acids in patients with irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Qinghua Sun et al. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Feb.

Abstract

Background: Recent studies indicate that gut microbiota disorders potentially contribute to the pathogenesis of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), which can be partly reflected by fecal short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) generated from gut microbiota. Previous studies on SCFA alterations in patients with IBS have yielded conflicting results. No prior systematic review has been conducted on the alterations in fecal SCFAs in IBS patients.

Aims: We performed a meta-analysis to explore and clarify alterations in fecal SCFAs in IBS patients.

Methods: Case-control studies, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and self-controlled studies were identified through electronic database searches. The standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in fecal SCFA levels between different groups was calculated.

Results: The proportion of fecal propionate in patients with IBS was significantly higher than in healthy controls (HCs) (SMD = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.12, 0.76). A subgroup analysis showed that the concentration of fecal propionate (SMD = -0.91, 95% CI = -1.41, -0.41) and butyrate (SMD = -0.53, 95% CI = -1.01, -0.04) in patients with constipation-predominant IBS (IBS-C) was significantly lower than that in HCs, and the concentration of fecal butyrate in patients with diarrhea-predominant IBS (IBS-D) was higher than that in HCs (SMD = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.00, 0.67). Finally, we found that restricted diets correlated with fecal butyrate reduction in IBS (SMD = -0.26, 95% CI = -0.51, -0.01).

Conclusions: In terms of fecal SCFAs, there were differences between patients with IBS and HCs. In IBS-C patients, propionate and butyrate were reduced, whereas butyrate was increased in IBS-D patients in comparison to HCs. Propionate and butyrate could be used as biomarkers for IBS diagnosis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of study selection. HC = healthy control, IBS = irritable bowel syndrome, RCT = randomized controlled trial, SCFA = short-chain fatty acids, SD = standard deviation.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forest plots of alterations of fecal short-chain fatty acids in patients with irritable bowel syndrome versus healthy controls: (A-1) concentration of acetate, (A-2) proportion of acetate, (B-1) concentration of propionate, (B-2) proportion of propionate, (C-1) concentration of butyrate, (C-2) proportion of butyrate, (D-1) concentration of iso-butyrate, (D-2) proportion of iso-butyrate, (E-1) concentration of valerate, (E-2) proportion of valerate, (F-1) concentration of iso-valerate, and (F-2) proportion of iso-valerate. CI = confidence interval, SMD = standardized mean difference.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Forest plots of alterations of fecal short-chain fatty acids concentration in patients with different subtypes of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) versus healthy controls (HC): (A-1) acetate in constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C) vs HC, (A-2) acetate in diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D) vs HC, (B-1) propionate in IBS-C vs HC, (B-2) propionate in IBS-D vs HC, (C-1) butyrate in IBS-C vs HC, and (C-2) butyrate in IBS-D vs HC. CI = confidence interval, SMD = standardized mean difference
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plots of alterations of fecal short-chain fatty acids concentration in patients with irritable bowel syndrome after different treatments: (A-1) acetate after restricted diet, (A-2) acetate after probiotics treatment, (B-1) propionate after restricted diet, (B-2) propionate after probiotics treatment, (C-1) butyrate after restricted diet, (C-2) butyrate after probiotics treatment, (D-1) iso-butyrate after restricted diet, (D-2) iso-butyrate after probiotics treatment, (E-1) valerate after restricted diet, (E-2) valerate after probiotics treatment, (F-1) iso-valerate after restricted diet, and (F-2) iso-valerate after probiotics treatment. CI = confidence interval, SMD = standardized mean difference.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Funnel plots of included studies analyzing the concentration of fecal short-chain fatty acids from patients with irritable bowel syndrome versus healthy controls: (A) acetate, (B) propionate, (C) butyrate. SE = standard error, SMD = standardized mean difference.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Guthrie E, Creed F, Fernandes L, et al. Cluster analysis of symptoms and health seeking behaviour differentiates subgroups of patients with severe irritable bowel syndrome. Gut 2003;52:1616–22. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Drossman DA. The functional gastrointestinal disorders and the Rome III process. Gastroenterology 2006;130:1377–90. - PubMed
    1. Evangelista S. Benefits from long-term treatment in irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2012;2012:936960. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Müller-Lissner S, Kamm MA, Musoglu A, et al. Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of tegaserod over 13 months in patients with chronic constipation. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:2558–69. quiz 2671. - PubMed
    1. Müller-Lissner S, Holtmann G, Rueegg P, et al. Tegaserod is effective in the initial and retreatment of irritable bowel syndrome with constipation. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2005;21:11–20. - PubMed