2023 Impact Factor
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic functional gastrointestinal disorder characterized by recurrent abdominal pain related to defecation and/or changes in the frequency or form of stool.1 According to the predominant stool form of the patients, IBS is classified as IBS with predominant diarrhea (IBS-D), IBS with predominant constipation (IBS-C), IBS with mixed bowel habits, and IBS unclassified.2 The mechanism of symptom generation is multifactorial, including altered motility of the gut, visceral hypersensitivity, central dysfunction, low-grade inflammation, increased intestinal permeability, disorders of the brain-gut axis, and altered gut microbiota.3-5 Over the last decade, microbiota and their metabolites have been paid attention to as the cause of IBS symptoms.5-8
Alteration of the gut microbiota has been reported in patients with IBS.9 The impact of the microbiome on disease etiology could occur via the actions of microbiota-derived metabolites, including bile acids (BAs). BAs are amphipathic molecules produced in the liver, which solubilize lipids into micelles for digestion and absorption.10 Approximately 95% of secreted BAs are reabsorbed in the terminal ileum, and the remaining BAs reach the colon, where they are metabolized by gut microbiota, forming a plethora of microbially modified secondary BAs.11 According to the characteristics of BA profiles, BAs can exert their variable effects on gut function, including fluid secretion, mucosal permeability, and bowel motility.12-14 BAs can also modify gut microbiota.15 Given the vital role of gut microbiota and BAs in regulating gut function, their bidirectional relationship may contribute to the pathophysiology of IBS. Indeed, individuals with IBS have been reported to have altered microbial profiles and modified BA profiles.16
In this review, we describe BA synthesis and enterohepatic circulation (EHC), transformations of BAs, BA signaling mechanisms, and influences of BA on gut microbiota and functions, and summarize the clinical trials investigating alterations of gut microbiota and BA profiles in patients with IBS.
BAs are hydroxylated, amphipathic molecules synthesized in the peroxisomes of the liver from cholesterol through 2 major pathways.17 The newly synthesized BAs are termed primary BAs, including chenodeoxycholic acid (CDCA) and cholic acid (CA), to distinguish them from the products of microbial transformation, termed secondary BAs. Of the 2 major pathways, the classical pathway is more important in adult humans and produces both primary BAs favoring CA biosynthesis.18,19 The alternative pathway results in CDCA biosynthesis and involves less than 10% of BA synthesis.19,20 The enzyme cholesterol 7α-hydroxylase (CYP7A1) is the rate-limiting step in the classical pathway.21,22 7α-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one (C4) is a downstream product of CYP7A1, reflecting the enzymatic activity of hepatic CYP7A1. Thus, measuring serum C4 is a simple test for analyzing hepatic BA synthesis, although it requires a standardized specimen collection time because of diurnal variability.8,21 The primary BAs (CDCA and CA) are conjugated to the hydrophilic amino acids, either glycine or taurine (GCDCA/TCDCA and GCA/TCA) in the liver. Humans preferably use glycine for conjugation.23 The conjugation of BAs permits complete ionization of BAs, which increases their solubility and decreases their passive diffusion across the intestinal epithelial barrier, leading to high intraluminal concentrations that facilitate micellar solubilization of dietary lipids.24,25 These primary BAs are secreted into the gallbladder, where they are stored until the consumption of food. Ingestion of food triggers the release of cholecystokinin by enteroendocrine cells, which causes gallbladder contraction and the release of BAs into the duodenum.26,27 There, BAs facilitate the digestion and absorption of dietary lipids, fatty acids, cholesterol, fat-soluble vitamins, and other hydrophobic components of the diet via their surfactant properties, which emulsify fats into micelles.10 Approximately 95% of secreted BAs are reabsorbed in the terminal ileum and transported back into the liver via the EHC.28 The ileal apical Na+-dependent bile salt transporter (ASBT), which has a greater affinity for conjugated than non-conjugated BAs, actively reuptakes conjugated BAs.8,11 After the uptake of BAs by ASBT, ileal lipid-binding proteins bind to intracellular BAs, shuttling them to the heterodimeric protein, organic solute transporter alpha-beta, which efficiently exports them to the portal circulation.29,30 Some passive diffusion across the gut epithelium can also occur for both conjugated and non-conjugated BAs.31 The remaining 5% of BAs that reach the colon are either reabsorbed via passive diffusion or lost in the feces (Figure).11
In ileal enterocytes, BAs activate the nuclear receptor farnesoid X receptor (FXR), with CDCA being the most potent agonist (Table 1).20,32 FXR then induces the expression of fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF19; rodent ortholog is FGF15). FGF19 is secreted from enterocytes into the portal circulation and activates the cell surface receptor, a complex of the β-klotho protein and FGF receptor 4 in hepatocytes, resulting in the downregulation of CYP7A1 and thereby reducing BA synthesis.8,33-35 As serum FGF19 decreases and is inversely related to serum C4 during BA malabsorption, it could be used for screening tests for malabsorption.8,36-38
Table 1 . Receptors Involved in the Signaling of Bile Acids
Receptor | Sites | BA agonist | Functions |
---|---|---|---|
FXR | Nuclear receptor, widespread throughout the body, abundant in the liver, intestine, and kidneys | CDCA > DCA > LCA > CA | Regulation of BA synthesis, absorption, and transport |
Maintenance of metabolic homeostasis | |||
Modulation of immune system | |||
TGR5 | Membrane receptor, widespread throughout the body including the intestine, liver, biliary tract, and gallbladder | LCA > DCA > CDCA > CA | Regulation of the intestinal motility and secretion |
Maintenance of metabolic homeostasis | |||
Maintenance of intestinal immune homeostasis | |||
PXR | Nuclear receptor, abundant in the liver and intestine | LCA, only weakly to CDCA, DCA, CA, and conjugated BAs | Detoxication of xenobiotics and LCA |
Maintenance of intestinal immune homeostasis | |||
Modulation of BA homeostasis | |||
VDR | Nuclear receptor, widespread throughout the body, abundant in the intestine | LCA | Detoxication of LCA |
Modulation of BA synthesis | |||
Maintenance of bone and calcium homeostasis |
BA, bile acid; FXR, farnesoid X receptor; CDCA, chenodeoxycholic acid; DCA, deoxycholic acid; LCA, lithocholic acid; CA, cholic acid; TGR5, Takeda G protein-coupled receptor 5; PXR, pregnane X receptor; VDR, vitamin D receptor.
Small quantities of primary BAs that escape EHC reach the colon and undergo extensive microbial biotransformations, including deconjugation, 7α-dehydroxylation, oxidation/epimerization, and sulfation by the gut microbiota, to produce a broad range of secondary BAs.39 In fact, BA biotransformations begin in the small intestine and continues in the colon. Deconjugation of BAs changes their physiochemical properties, making them more lipophilic and susceptible to microbial biotransformation; thus, this is considered the gateway reaction for further modification.40-44 Cleavage of amino acid side chains on conjugated BAs is mediated by bile salt hydrolase (BSH) enzymes that are widely expressed by the gut microbiota.39-43,45
The diversity of intestinal gram-positive bacteria, including
Once deconjugated, free primary BAs are metabolized by the resident microbiota into free secondary BAs, such as deoxycholic acid (DCA), lithocholic acid (LCA), and ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) via 7α-dehydroxylation and oxidation/epimerization.44,59-61 CDCA is transformed into DCA and CA into LCA by 7α-dehydroxylation. Because DCA and LCA predominate in human feces, 7α-dehydroxylation is the most quantitatively important microbial transformation.41 Human intestinal bacteria capable of 7α-dehydroxylation belong to the genus
Epimerization of the 3-, 7-, and 12-hydroxy groups of BAs is carried out by hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (HSDH) expressed by intestinal bacteria, which diversifies the chemistry of secondary BAs. Epimerization is a reversible change in stereochemistry from the α to β configuration (or vice versa) with the generation of a stable oxo-BA intermediate. While α-hydroxy BAs are amphipathic, both faces of BA are hydrophilic in β orientation.41 Epimerization requires 2 distinct steps: oxidation of the hydroxyl group by a position-specific HSDH, followed by the reduction of the hydroxyl group by another position-specific HSDH.39,41 CA can be epimerized to form ursoCA, 12-epiCA, or isoCA, and CDCA can be epimerized to form either UDCA (7β-hydroxy) or isoCDCA. Epimerization of UDCA to CDCA can also be carried out by 7β-HSDH.41 3-oxoLCA and isoLCA produced by 3α-HSDH are known to suppress differentiation of T helper cells expressing IL-17A and may contribute to gut immune homeostasis.65 Although their enzyme characteristics vary, several intestinal microbes have been observed to produce HSDHs, including a small number of species of
Secondary BAs may undergo further modification including sulphation, imparting changes in their solubility, metabolism, excretion, and toxicity.78,79 Specifically, sulfated BAs are more rapidly excreted in the urine, and sulfated LCA is less efficiently reabsorbed in the intestine than non-sulfated.79 Sulfation of BAs may be associated with constipation.80 In a subset of children with functional constipation, dominant fecal BA was the 3-sulfate of CDCA. Such sulfation may abolish the secretory activity of CDCA and contribute to constipation. In an animal experiment, sulfation prevented secretion caused by di-α-hydroxy BAs (DCA and CDCA) in the colon.81 Notably, increased fecal sulfated BAs were also observed in patients with IBS-D compared with that in IBS-C.36 Further research that includes measurements of sulfotransferase and sulfatase activity is necessary.
Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) is one manifestation of gut microbiome dysbiosis and is highly prevalent in IBS.82 Many bacteria in the small intestine have the capacity to metabolize BAs. Shindo et al83 isolated bacterial species from the jejunal fluid obtained from patients with progressive systemic sclerosis and positive 14CO2 breath test. The isolated
Because of the variety of levels and types of BAs in the intestine, biliary tract, and liver, BAs have emerged as important regulators of epithelial physiology and pathophysiology.11,86 Since the discovery of BA receptors, there have been advances in understanding how BAs exert their effects.
G protein-coupled BA receptor 1, also called Takeda G protein-coupled receptor 5 (TGR5), is responsive to BAs as a cell surface receptor.87,88 TGR5 is a member of the G protein-coupled receptor family, which stimulates cAMP synthesis and activates protein kinase-A, leading to the expression of target genes.87 TGR5 is widely expressed throughout the body, including in the intestine, liver, biliary tract, and gallbladder.56,87,89-91 The functions of TGR5 are thought to be broader than just being a metabolic regulator of energy homeostasis, BA homeostasis, and glucose metabolism.92 Particularly notable is that the activation of TGR5 on the intestinal motor neurons by BAs regulates intestinal motility.93 Conjugated and unconjugated BAs bind to TGR5, with the secondary BAs LCA and DCA being most potent, followed by CDCA and CA.87
Physiological concentrations of free and conjugated BAs activate the nuclear receptor FXR as ligands.94,95 The structure–activity relationship of BAs in activating FXR shows the order of potency of CDCA > DCA > LCA > CA.96 CDCA is an extremely effective activator of FXR, whereas CA is inactive. CA and conjugated BAs are hydrophilic compounds that do not readily cross cell membranes; instead, they are passively diffused or facilitated by BA transport proteins.96,97 FXR is widely expressed throughout the body and highly expressed in the liver, intestine, and kidneys.32,98 As aforementioned, the primary function of FXR activation by BAs is the feedback inhibition of BA synthesis through the downregulation of CYP7A1.8,33-35 In addition, FXR is important in metabolic homeostasis.99,100 Pregnane X receptor (PXR) is another nuclear receptor that can be activated by BAs and is highly expressed in the liver and intestine.101 The role of PXR in the detoxication of xenobiotics and LCA is well known.102,103 PXR also contributes to maintaining intestinal immune homeostasis104,105 PXR downregulates BSH-active bacteria in the intestine and modulates BA homeostasis.101 PXR is activated by LCA but only weakly responds to CDCA, DCA, CA, and conjugated BAs.106 Vitamin D receptors (VDR) are another type of BA-sensitive nuclear receptor, widely expressed throughout the body, with an abundance in the intestine.107 In addition to the classic endogenous ligand, 1,25-dihydroxy vitamin D3, LCA can activate VDR.108 It contributes to the metabolism of BAs as well as calcium homeostasis and bone maintenance. Activation of VDR by LCA or vitamin D induced the expression of CYP3A and the multidrug resistance-associated protein-3 (MRP3).108,109 Hydroxylation of LCA by CYP3A reduces the toxicity of LCA, which is hepatotoxic and a potential enteric carcinogen in the liver and intestine, and MRP3 effluxes LCA into the blood to protect colon cells from LCA toxicity.
Like bacterial enzymes chemically modify BA profile, BAs can modify the gut microbiota. BAs are potent antimicrobials and play an important role in the innate immune defense within the intestine.15 As BAs act as detergents in the gut, they allow for the disruption of bacterial membranes, leading to the leakage of proton, potassium ion, and other cellular components and eventually cell death.110 The antimicrobial potency of DCA is greater than that of CA due to its hydrophobicity and detergent properties on bacterial membranes.111 When tested against
Gram-negative bacteria are thought to have a higher BA tolerance than Gram-positives.115
Generally, BAs induce colonic fluid secretion at high levels.13 However, there is a marked structural specificity for BA-induced secretion, and the α-dihydroxy BAs CDCA and DCA have prosecretory effects.120,121 The trihydroxy BA (CA) does not have prosecretory effects, and UDCA (7β-OH epimer of CDCA) has antisecretory effects.13,122 The conjugation status of BAs is also an important determining factor of their secretory effects.121 Because conjugated BAs are hydrophilic and need to be more lipophilic to cross the cell membrane, they do not have secretory effects. However, conjugated BAs can increase epithelial permeability at a relatively high concentration, which allows them to gain access to regions where they can exert their secretory effects.123 In contrast to prosecretory effects at pathophysiological concentrations, lower levels of DCA is known to downregulate colonic epithelial secretory function.124 These observations suggest that BAs play an important role in regulating colonic fluid levels.
In addition to the regulation of fluid transport, BAs can exert their effects on gut motility.12-14 In humans, rectal CDCA infusion induces propagating pressure waves arising in the proximal colon.14 In another human infusion study, CDCA was more strongly associated with a higher colonic motility index than TCA, which contrasts with the animal (rabbit) results obtained in the same study.125 In an in vitro study, DCA increased isolated human colon motility, whereas CDCA and CA did not.126 The mechanism of action of DCA on smooth muscle activity was revealed as a local neuronal phenomenon in the rabbit colon in vitro.127 However, inhibitory actions of BAs on colon motility have also been shown in animal studies. Luminal bile from the gallbladder and conjugated primary BA (TCA and TCDCA) inhibit contractions of the intestine (isolated rabbit terminal ileal segment and isolated guinea pig ileum smooth muscle strips).128,129 A mouse intestine study demonstrated that DCA inhibits intestinal motility by activating TGR5 on inhibitory motor neurons to release nitric oxide, whereas the effects of UDCA and TDCA were not significant.93 However, contractile inhibition of in vitro colon tissue in particular muscle strips does not indicate decreased gut motility, because peristalsis requires the both contraction and relaxation of gut muscles. In a mouse study, DCA reduced the contractility of colonic longitudinal muscles but could stimulate the ascending contraction and descending relaxation components of the peristaltic reflex of the flat sheet preparation of the proximal colon.130 Furthermore, oral administration of CDCA improved bowel function in patients with either IBS-C or chronic constipation.131,132
BAs can also affect gut sensitivity. Rectal infusion of DCA and CDCA at physiological concentrations reduces rectal sensory thresholds.14,133 The mechanism of visceral hypersensitivity induced by BAs has been investigated in animal studies.134,135 BAs stimulate the release of nerve growth factor from mucosal mast cells through the activation of FXR, resulting in the activation of transient receptor potential vanilloid 1.134 TGR5 agonists, including DCA, also activate subsets of colonic sensory neurons and evoke colonic afferent mechanical hypersensitivity via a transient receptor potential ankyrin A1-dependent mechanism.135
In several clinical studies, the BA profiles of patients with IBS and those of healthy controls (HC) differ (Table 2).16,36,136-141 The level of total fecal BA was higher in IBS-D patients than that in HC, according to 3 studies of Asian groups.136-138 On the other hand, Western studies demonstrated no differences in the level of total fecal BA between IBS-D groups and HC.16,36,139 Most studies had measured total BA excretion in a single stool, which might be acceptable but is not ideal.142 When stool samples were collected over 48 hours, the level of total fecal BA was higher in IBS-D group than in IBS-C group, but not in HC.139 In addition, total fecal BA correlated with stool weight. However, because total fecal BA was determined from total 3α hydroxy BAs, some subgroups of BAs could have been missed. Taken together, the levels of fecal total BAs in the IBS-D group showed an increasing tendency compared with the levels in IBS-C group or HC. Notably, a systematic review showed that 32% of patients with symptoms consistent with IBS-D had moderate BA malabsorption (75selenium homotaurocholic acid test 7 day retention < 5% of baseline value).143 Zhao et al137 investigated the connection between the gut microbiota in IBS-D group and BA excretion. Twenty-five percent of patients with IBS-D (71 of 290, BA+IBS-D) had an excess of total BA excretion in feces by the 90th percentile cutoff value, determined from the HC (n = 89). BA+IBS-D group exhibited increased C4 and decreased FGF19 levels in sera, as well as an increased severity of diarrheal symptoms compared with the corresponding values in the BA–IBS-D group and HC. Different microbial profiles were found in BA+IBS-D compared to either HC or BA–IBS-D. The relative abundances of the phyla Firmicutes, Actinobacteria, Fusobacteria, and Proteobacteria increased, and that of Bacteroidetes decreased in the BA+IBS-D group. At the genus level, the abundance of
Table 2 . Summary of Clinical Studies Investigating the Bile Acid Profiles and Fecal Microbiota in Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Study | Participants (n) | Fecal BA profile | Fecal microbiota |
---|---|---|---|
Wong et al (2012)139 | HC (26), IBS-C (26), and IBS-D (26) | Higher total BA in IBS-D than in IBS-C but not than in HC Total BA correlated with stool weight and fat | Not investigated |
Duboc et al (2012)16 | HC (18) and IBS-D (14) | Similar total BA in IBS-D and HC Increased PBA (%) and decreased SBA (%) in IBS-D than in HC | Decreased the Increased |
Shin et al (2013)140 | HC (30), IBS-C (30), and IBS-D or FD (31) | Increased total UBA in IBS-D than in IBS-C but not than in HC Higher primary UBA (%) in IBS-D than in HC Lower secretory CDCA and DCA (%) in IBS-C than in HC Higher non-secretory secondary LCA (%) in IBS-C than in HC | Not investigated |
Dior et al (2016)36 | HC (15), IBS-C (15), and IBS-D (16) | No differences of total BAs among the three groups Increased PBAs and decreased SBAs in IBS-D compared to HC Increased sulfated BAs and UDCA in IBS-D compared to HC Increased CDCA, sulfated BAs, and UDCA in IBS-D compared to IBS-C | No differences in the total fecal bacteria counts in the 3 groups Increased relative counts of Increased relative counts of |
Zhao et al (2020)137 | HC (89) and IBS-D (290) | Increased total BA in IBS-D than in HC Increased amounts of CA, CDCA, DCA, LCA, 7-KDCA, UDCA, and ωMCA and increased % of CA, CDCA, UDCA, and 7-KDCA and decreased % of LCA and 12-KLCA in IBS-D with high BA excretion compared with HC | Increased abundances of Clostridia bacteria, Positive correlation of the abundances of Clostridia genera and |
Wei et al (2020)136 | HC (28) and IBS-D (55) | Increased total fecal BA in IBS-D than in HC Increased PBAs and decreased SBAs in IBS-D than in HC Decreased LCA in IBS-D than in HC Increased CBAs, UBAs, and ratio of CBAs/UBAs in IBS-D | Increased Proteobacteria, Gammaproteobacteria, Enterobacteriales, and Enterobacteriaceae and decreased Clostridia, Clostridiales, and Ruminococcaceae in IBS-D Decreased 9 genera including 5 from Ruminococcaceae in IBS-D Negative correlation of PBAs and positive correlation of SBAs with 8 genera among decreased 9 |
Wei et al (2021)138 | HC (32) and IBS-D (52) | Increased total fecal BA in IBS-D than in HC Increased PBAs and decreased SBAs in IBS-D than in HC | Not investigated |
James et al (2021)141 | HC (97), IBS-D (52), and IBS-C (24) | Increased CA in IBS-D than in HC but not in IBS-C Increased CDCA in IBS-D than in IBS-C and in HC Decreased GCA in IBS-C than in IBS-D and in HC | Not investigated |
BA, bile acid; HC, healthy control; IBS-C, constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome; IBS-D, diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome; PBA, primary bile acid; SBA, secondary bile acid;
As the fecal BA pool is modulated by the gut microbiota and gut dysbiosis is implicated in the pathophysiology of IBS.6 Although conjugated BAs increased in IBS-D group, only a small subgroup of patients had a high conjugated BAs to unconjugated BAs ratio.136 Thus, impaired deconjugation of BAs may not widely exist in IBS-D.136 Duboc et al16 observed a significant increase in fecal primary BA and a corresponding decrease in secondary BA in IBS-D compared with that in HC, which has consistently been reported.36,136,138 Moreover, fecal primary BA percentage was positively correlated with the Bristol stool score and stool frequency, whereas secondary BA was negatively correlated with these parameters. Similarly, in other studies, primary BA was positively correlated with the Bristol stool score36 and defecation frequency,36,138 and secondary BA was negatively correlated with defecation frequency.138 Two α-dihydroxy BAs, CDCA and DCA, have prosecretory effects. Indeed, CDCA and DCA correlate with stool frequency and the score in IBS-D,140 and percentages of CDCA and DCA were lower in IBS-C than that in HC.140,141 However, decreased secondary DCA in IBS-D was also observed.16 From other studies providing the absolute amounts of individual BAs, differences in DCA were not significant, but CDCA was 20 times to 30 times higher in IBS-D than in HC.136,138 Thus, the change in CDCA amount seems to predominantly exert an effect on the stool score and frequency in IBS-D. The relationship between fecal BA excretion, fecal BA profile, and colon transit appears to be very complex as being a cause and/or consequence. First, clarification is necessary regarding whether the altered BA profile is due to a dysfunction of microbial biotransformation related to gut dysbiosis or due to rapid gut transit, decreasing the time for gut microbiota to metabolize BAs in patients with IBS-D.
In addition, primary BA showed a positive correlation with abdominal pain in IBS-D.36 Wei et al138 investigated the relationship between BAs and their receptors (TGR5 and VDR) in patients with IBS-D. They observed that the level of TGR5 immunoreactivity in rectosigmoid mucosal biopsies was higher in IBS-D than that in HC. Furthermore, the level of TGR5 was higher in patients with more severe or frequent abdominal pain and was positively associated with primary BAs and negatively associated with secondary BAs. Although no direct link between fecal BAs and abdominal pain has been demonstrated, BAs might contribute to the hypersensitivity of patients with IBS-D via increased TGR5 level in the colon. Increased TGR5 expression is thought to be a compensatory response to decreased levels of potent agonists, secondary BAs (LCA and DCA).
Importantly, an imbalance between primary and secondary BAs in IBS-D has been consistently reported. Because BAs are metabolized by the gut microbiota, dysbiosis could be a critical factor in the altered BA profiles observed in IBS-D patients. Duboc et al16 demonstrated the presence of gut dysbiosis and altered BA profiles in patients with IBS. They observed an increase in
To determine whether the alteration of BA profiles is due to a dysfunction in biotransformation related to gut dysbiosis, establishing a direct link between the BA profile alteration and microbial variations is necessary. Wei et al136 assessed the correlation between fecal BAs (CA, CDCA, DCA, LCA, and UDCA) and the gut microbiome in Chinese patients with IBS-D. At the genus level, nine genera were significantly less abundant, including the genera in Ruminococcaceae (
Conditions other than microbial biotransformation are linked to changes in luminal BA characteristics. The BA pool in patients with cirrhosis is depleted due to decreased synthesis.144 The decrease in fecal BAs promotes the depletion of Firmicutes and expansion of proinflammatory pathogenic bacteria of Proteobacteria.115 Depletion of 7α-dehydroxylation bacteria leads to an increased primary to secondary BA ratio in patients with cirrhosis. Because the gallbladder stores and releases primary BAs, cholecystectomy may affect BA homeostasis. Gallbladder removal may increase the formation and pool size of secondary BAs due to the increased exposure of primary BAs to bacterial biotransformation in the intestine. However, cholecystectomy does not lead to significant changes in the BA profile in the long term.145,146 Defects in the formation and transport of BA could affect the BA pool.147 Several inherited defects in enzymes, including CYP7A1, could be involved in BA synthesis. In multiple biosynthetic pathways, a single enzyme defect is usually not sufficient to block the production of all BAs. These rare genetic diseases are characterized by cholestasis, neurological disorders, and fat-soluble vitamin deficiency.148 Inherited transporter defects are also rare, and the spectrum ranges from benign conditions such as benign recurrent intrahepatic cholestasis to progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis.149 Typically, the first presentation of progressive familial intrahepatic cholestasis is in early childhood, frequently followed by a severe course requiring liver transplantation before adulthood.150
Diverse BA profiles can regulate gut functions in terms of fluid absorption and secretion, motility, and sensitivity. Elucidating the underlying mechanisms of action help clarify their contributions to the pathophysiology of IBS, especially in IBS-D. Because of the reciprocal relationship between altered BA profiles and dysbiosis in IBS, integrating their analysis seems necessary and could provide insights into the pathophysiology and treatment of IBS. However, few relevant studies have been conducted, and they involved only a small number of subjects, mostly patients with IBS-D. Furthermore, the observational and cross-sectional study designs did not show causal associations among altered BA profiles, gut dysbiosis, and bowel symptoms. Therefore, associations between the BA profile and gut microbiome require further investigation using several conditions and samples, for example, small bowel aspiration samples of patients with SIBO. In addition, large longitudinal and interventional studies are warranted to verify previous observations.
None.
None.
Yang Won Min drafted the manuscript; Ali Rezaie performed critical revision of the manuscript; and Mark Pimentel contributed to editing and revision of the manuscript. All the authors approved the final version of the manuscript.