Reconstruction of ancient microbial genomes from the human gut

Loss of gut microbial diversity in industrial populations is associated with chronic diseases, underscoring the importance of studying our ancestral gut microbiome. However, relatively little is known about the composition of pre-industrial gut microbiomes. Here we performed a large-scale de novo assembly of microbial genomes from palaeofaeces. From eight authenticated human palaeofaeces samples (1,000–2,000 years old) with well-preserved DNA from southwestern USA and Mexico, we reconstructed 498 medium- and high-quality microbial genomes. Among the 181 genomes with the strongest evidence of being ancient and of human gut origin, 39% represent previously undescribed species-level genome bins. Tip dating suggests an approximate diversification timeline for the key human symbiont Methanobrevibacter smithii. In comparison to 789 present-day human gut microbiome samples from eight countries, the palaeofaeces samples are more similar to non-industrialized than industrialized human gut microbiomes. Functional profiling of the palaeofaeces samples reveals a markedly lower abundance of antibiotic-resistance and mucin-degrading genes, as well as enrichment of mobile genetic elements relative to industrial gut microbiomes. This study facilitates the discovery and characterization of previously undescribed gut microorganisms from ancient microbiomes and the investigation of the evolutionary history of the human gut microbiota through genome reconstruction from palaeofaeces

Prevalence and risk factors for mesh erosion after laparoscopic-assisted sacrocolpopexy

The purpose of this study is to identify risk factors for mesh erosion in women undergoing minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy (MISC). We hypothesize that erosion is higher in subjects undergoing concomitant hysterectomy. This is a retrospective cohort study of women who underwent MISC between November 2004 and January 2009. Demographics, operative techniques, and outcomes were abstracted from medical records. Multivariable regression identified odds of erosion. Of 188 MISC procedures 19(10%) had erosions. Erosion was higher in those with total vaginal hysterectomy (TVH) compared to both post-hysterectomy (23% vs. 5%, p = 0.003) and supracervical hysterectomy (SCH) (23% vs. 5%, p = 0.109) groups. In multivariable regression, the odds of erosion for TVH was 5.67 (95% CI: 1.88–17.10) compared to post-hysterectomy. Smoking, the use of collagen-coated mesh, transvaginal dissection, and mesh attachment transvaginally were no longer significant in the multivariable regression model. Based on this study, surgeons should consider supracervical hysterectomy over total vaginal hysterectomy as the procedure of choice in association with MISC unless removal of the cervix is otherwise indicated

A pilot study comparing anatomic failure after sacrocolpopexy with absorbable or permanent sutures for vaginal mesh attachment.

ObjectivesTo describe anatomic failure rates for sacrocolpopexy in groups receiving either delayed absorbable or permanent monofilament suture for mesh attachment to the vagina.MethodsWe reviewed the medical records of 193 women who underwent sacrocolpopexy with 2 different types of sutures attaching polypropylene mesh to the vagina: delayed absorbable sutures (median follow-up, 43 weeks) and permanent sutures (median follow-up, 106 weeks). Vaginal apical failure was defined as Point C greater than or equal to half of the total vaginal length. Anterior-posterior compartmental failures were defined as Point Ba and/or Point Bp more than 0 cm. Fisher exact and χ2 tests were used to compare failure rates. There were no documented suture erosions in the delayed absorbable monofilament suture group during the review period. Two patients in the permanent suture group were found to have permanent suture in the bladder more than 30 weeks after the index procedure.ResultsFailure rates for the 45 subjects in the delayed absorbable group and 148 subjects in the permanent suture group were similar (4.4% vs 3.4%, p = 0.74) and not statistically different in any compartment: apical (0% vs 1.4%, p = 0.43), anterior (4.4% vs 2%, p = 0.38), or posterior (0% vs 1.4%, p = 0.43).ConclusionsDelayed absorbable monofilament suture appears to be a reasonable alternative to permanent suture for mesh attachment to the vagina during sacrocolpopexy. The use of delayed absorbable suture could potentially prevent complications of suture erosion into the bladder or vagina remote from the time of surgery

A pilot study comparing anatomic failure after sacrocolpopexy with absorbable or permanent sutures for vaginal mesh attachment.

ObjectivesTo describe anatomic failure rates for sacrocolpopexy in groups receiving either delayed absorbable or permanent monofilament suture for mesh attachment to the vagina.MethodsWe reviewed the medical records of 193 women who underwent sacrocolpopexy with 2 different types of sutures attaching polypropylene mesh to the vagina: delayed absorbable sutures (median follow-up, 43 weeks) and permanent sutures (median follow-up, 106 weeks). Vaginal apical failure was defined as Point C greater than or equal to half of the total vaginal length. Anterior-posterior compartmental failures were defined as Point Ba and/or Point Bp more than 0 cm. Fisher exact and χ2 tests were used to compare failure rates. There were no documented suture erosions in the delayed absorbable monofilament suture group during the review period. Two patients in the permanent suture group were found to have permanent suture in the bladder more than 30 weeks after the index procedure.ResultsFailure rates for the 45 subjects in the delayed absorbable group and 148 subjects in the permanent suture group were similar (4.4% vs 3.4%, p = 0.74) and not statistically different in any compartment: apical (0% vs 1.4%, p = 0.43), anterior (4.4% vs 2%, p = 0.38), or posterior (0% vs 1.4%, p = 0.43).ConclusionsDelayed absorbable monofilament suture appears to be a reasonable alternative to permanent suture for mesh attachment to the vagina during sacrocolpopexy. The use of delayed absorbable suture could potentially prevent complications of suture erosion into the bladder or vagina remote from the time of surgery

A randomized trial of vaginal mesh attachment techniques for minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.

Introduction and hypothesisWe investigated the efficiency and efficacy of vaginal mesh attachment using interrupted, non-barbed, delayed absorbable sutures in comparison with a running, barbed, delayed absorbable suture during laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) and robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC).MethodsWomen undergoing LSC or RSC were recruited. Participants were randomized to at least six 0 PDS non-barbed interrupted sutures or at least six passes of a 1 PDS barbed suture (Quill™) on each anterior and posterior polypropylene mesh leaflet. The primary outcome was the time to attach the mesh to the vagina. The LSC and RSC groups were block randomized by suture type. Secondary outcomes included: (1) intraoperative surgeon assessment of satisfaction as measured using a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS), (2) postoperative POP-Q evaluation for anatomic failure, and (3) overall appearance of vaginal walls measured using a VAS.ResultsOf the 64 included subjects who were randomized, 32 had mesh attachment with the barbed suture (16 LSC, 16 RSC) and 32 had attachment with non-barbed sutures (16 LSC, 16 RSC). Among all the subjects (LSC and RSC), the non-barbed suture group had significantly longer mesh attachment times than the barbed suture group (42 vs. 29 min, p < 0.001). The non-barbed suture group had significantly better scores for intraoperative ease of suture placement, surgeon satisfaction with mesh appearance, and global satisfaction. At 12 months, there were no significant differences in anatomic failure between the suture groups or overall appearance of the vaginal walls (p > 0.05).ConclusionsThe barbed suture technique was 11 - 16 min faster for attaching mesh to the vagina than the non-barbed suture technique. Anatomic outcomes at 12 months were comparable between the suture groups. It is reasonable to use a running, barbed suture in minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy

A randomized trial of vaginal mesh attachment techniques for minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy.

Introduction and hypothesisWe investigated the efficiency and efficacy of vaginal mesh attachment using interrupted, non-barbed, delayed absorbable sutures in comparison with a running, barbed, delayed absorbable suture during laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) and robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSC).MethodsWomen undergoing LSC or RSC were recruited. Participants were randomized to at least six 0 PDS non-barbed interrupted sutures or at least six passes of a 1 PDS barbed suture (Quill™) on each anterior and posterior polypropylene mesh leaflet. The primary outcome was the time to attach the mesh to the vagina. The LSC and RSC groups were block randomized by suture type. Secondary outcomes included: (1) intraoperative surgeon assessment of satisfaction as measured using a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS), (2) postoperative POP-Q evaluation for anatomic failure, and (3) overall appearance of vaginal walls measured using a VAS.ResultsOf the 64 included subjects who were randomized, 32 had mesh attachment with the barbed suture (16 LSC, 16 RSC) and 32 had attachment with non-barbed sutures (16 LSC, 16 RSC). Among all the subjects (LSC and RSC), the non-barbed suture group had significantly longer mesh attachment times than the barbed suture group (42 vs. 29 min, p < 0.001). The non-barbed suture group had significantly better scores for intraoperative ease of suture placement, surgeon satisfaction with mesh appearance, and global satisfaction. At 12 months, there were no significant differences in anatomic failure between the suture groups or overall appearance of the vaginal walls (p > 0.05).ConclusionsThe barbed suture technique was 11 - 16 min faster for attaching mesh to the vagina than the non-barbed suture technique. Anatomic outcomes at 12 months were comparable between the suture groups. It is reasonable to use a running, barbed suture in minimally invasive sacrocolpopexy