Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Flow chart of how many study participants were included/excluded in the study.

* 8 were excluded in the FMS-group: 1 Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, 1 unclear autoimmune disease, 1 stroke in anamnesis, 1 acute severe pneumonia, 2 non-compliant, 2 lost contact. ** 1 was excluded in the healthy control (HC) group: autoimmune disease.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Demographic data (age, sex, BMI, smoking status) and dietary, medication and psychometric profiles of patients with FMS vs healthy controls.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Alpha-diversity statistics for the microbiome in FMS patients vs. healthy controls.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 2.

Taxonomic composition of bacterial phyla in FMS patients.

In FMS, mostly dominant were Bacteroidetes (44%), followed by Firmicutes (37%) and Proteobacteria (13%). All phyla were tested for differences with DeSeq2 (GMPR normalization) which did not reveal any significant results. Abbreviations: gmpr–geometric mean of pairwise ratios.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Taxonomic composition of bacterial phyla in healthy controls.

For healthy controls, the predominant phyla were Bacteroidetes (44%), Firmicutes (41%) and Proteobacteria (8%). All phyla were tested for differences with DeSeq2 (GMPR normalization) which did not reveal any significant results. Abbreviations: gmpr–geometric mean of pairwise ratios.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 3.

Statistical analysis of microbial beta-diversity in FMS patients vs healthy controls.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Canonical correspondence analysis (CCA) of the microbiota.

CCA analysis of microbiome in FMS patients and healthy controls (HC) failed to reveal a distinct “cluster” to each group.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Z-adjusted values of the variables measured in quantitative sensory testing in FMS patients relative to healthy controls.

* p<0.05, **p<0.001; we used ANOVA for statistical testing. CDT = cold detection threshold, WDT = warm detection threshold, CPT = cold pain threshold, HPT = heat pain threshold, TSL = temperature sensory limen, MDT = mechanical detection threshold, MPT = mechanical pain threshold, WUR = wind up ratio, PPT = pressure pain threshold, VDT = vibration detection threshold.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Z-adjusted values of paradoxical heat sensations measured in quantitative sensory testing in FMS patients relative to healthy controls.

We used ANOVA for statistical testing. PHS = paradoxical heat sensations.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Z-adjusted values of dynamic mechanic allodynia measured in quantitative sensory testing in FMS patients relative to healthy controls.

**p<0.001; we used ANOVA for statistical testing. DMA = dynamic mechanical allodynia.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Table 4.

Results of quantitative sensory testing of FMS patients vs healthy controls (HC, raw data).

More »

Table 4 Expand