Faecal microbiota transplantation is better than probiotics for tissue regeneration of type 2 diabetes mellitus injuries in mice

Abstract

Context

Western diet and unhealthy lifestyle have contributed to the continued growth of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). T2DM is associated with dysbacteriosis, and studies have found that altering the gut microbiota has a positive effect on treatment.

Objective

In addition to hyperglycaemia, T2DM often causes damage to multiple organs. However, there are few studies on organ damage from faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT).

Materials and methods

T2DM mice were divided into four groups and were given phosphate buffered saline (PBS) (T2DM group), FMT (FMT group), Lactobacillus (LAB group), and Bifidobacterium (BIO group) by gavage for six weeks, respectively. Mice on a normal diet (control group) were gavaged with PBS for six weeks.

Results

After gavage treatment, FMT, LAB, and BIO groups were similar in lowering glucose, endotoxemia was slightly reduced, and the colonic mucus layer and liver lobules developed towards normal tissue. Surprisingly, we found that the FMT group had unique effects on islet cell regeneration, increased functional β cells, and insulin sensitivity.

Discussion and conclusion

Lactobacillus has the best glucose-lowering effect, but FMT has obvious advantages in β-cell regeneration, which provides new treatment ideas for tissue damage caused by T2DM.

Keywords:

• Type 2 diabetes mellitus
• microbiota transplantation
• regeneration
• β cells

Acknowledgements

The experimental part of this study was carried out by the Experimental Animal Center of Fujian Medical University.

Ethics approval

All experiments were performed in compliance with the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0. All animal experiment protocols were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) of the Fujian Medical University following the Guidelines for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (Approval number: FJMU IACUC 2020–0019).

Consent form

All of the authors consent for publication.

Author contributions

Yuying Wang prepared the writing and drafting; Zhenpeng Yang, Huazhen Tang, Jinxiu Qu, and Yuying Wang collected the data; Benqiang Rao completed the review and editing; Xibo Sun and Shuai Lu supervised the data and approved the final manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The data used to support the findings of this study are included in the article/supplementary.