ReviewCureus2026
From Fecal Microbial Potential to Circulating Trimethylamine N-oxide and Cardiovascular Events: A Narrative Review.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO) is frequently presented as a gut microbiota-derived cardiovascular biomarker, but this label compresses several biologically distinct transitions into a single causal narrative. Microbial gene carriage does not establish active trimethylamine (TMA) flux; a fecal TMA or TMAO signal does not quantify the absorbed dose; circulating TMAO integrates microbial and dietary input with intestinal absorption, hepatic flavin-containing monooxygenase 3 (FMO3) activity, tissue distribution, sampling time, and renal clearance; and a prognostic association does not by itself demonstrate causal cardiovascular mediation. This critical narrative review examines the limits of inference across these levels. Meta-analyses of prospective cohorts have generally reported modest associations between higher circulating TMAO and adverse cardiovascular outcomes, while recent community cohorts provide additional positive evidence. Nevertheless, effect sizes and interpretation vary across populations, and null or context-dependent findings remain important. The closest prior compartment-focused systematic review evaluated the effect of red meat on circulating, urinary, and fecal TMAO in randomized trials. The present review addresses a different and broader question: when is it valid to move from stool-based microbial or metabolite measurements to systemic exposure and cardiovascular claims? We organize the evidence as a series of gates linking microbial capacity, realized luminal metabolism, absorption, FMO3-dependent oxidation, circulating concentration, and clinical outcome. The fecal TMAO literature remains sparse, and stool microbial profiles have not reliably predicted diet-induced systemic TMAO responses. Mendelian randomization and kidney-function studies further challenge a simple unidirectional causal interpretation. We propose a matrix-specific conceptual framework for reporting and study design. At present, fecal TMAO is best interpreted as an exploratory intestinal measurement, not as a surrogate for circulating TMAO or an independently validated cardiovascular risk marker. Future studies should pair biological matrices, quantify TMA and TMAO, standardize diet and timing, characterize renal and FMO3-relevant host factors, and test mediation rather than association alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.