-
Nutrients Sep 2019Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a frequent functional gastrointestinal disorder, and alterations in the gut microbiota composition contributes to symptom generation....
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a frequent functional gastrointestinal disorder, and alterations in the gut microbiota composition contributes to symptom generation. The exact mechanisms of probiotics in the human body are not fully understood, but probiotic supplements are thought to improve IBS symptoms through manipulation of the gut microbiota. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the latest randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of probiotic supplementation on symptoms in IBS patients. A literature search was conducted in Medline (PubMed) until March 2019. RCTs published within the last five years evaluating effects of probiotic supplements on IBS symptoms were eligible. The search identified in total 35 studies, of which 11 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. Seven studies (63.6%) reported that supplementation with probiotics in IBS patients significantly improved symptoms compared to placebo, whereas the remaining four studies (36.4%) did not report any significant improvement in symptoms after probiotic supplementation. Of note, three studies evaluated the effect of a mono-strain supplement, whereas the remaining eight trials used a multi-strain probiotic. Overall, the beneficial effects were more distinct in the trials using multi-strain supplements with an intervention of 8 weeks or more, suggesting that multi-strain probiotics supplemented over a period of time have the potential to improve IBS symptoms.
Topics: Bacteria; Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Humans; Irritable Bowel Syndrome; Probiotics
PubMed: 31480656
DOI: 10.3390/nu11092048 -
Nutrients Jan 2021Recent evidence supports a role of probiotics in preventing necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in preterm infants. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Recent evidence supports a role of probiotics in preventing necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in preterm infants.
METHODS
A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the role of probiotics in preventing NEC in preterm infants, focusing on the differential effect of type of feeding, was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A random-effects model was used; a subgroup analysis on exclusively human milk (HM)-fed infants vs. infants receiving formula (alone or with HM) was performed.
RESULTS
Fifty-one trials were included (10,664 infants, 29 probiotic interventions); 31 studies (19 different probiotic regimens) were suitable for subgroup analysis according to feeding. In the overall analysis, LB revealed the most promising effect for reducing NEC risk (odds ratio (OR), 0.03; 95% credible intervals (CrIs), 0.00-0.21). The subgroup analysis showed that Bb-12/B94 was associated with a reduced risk of NEC stage ≥2 in both feeding type populations, with a discrepancy in the relative effect size in favour of exclusively HM-fed infants (OR 0.04; 95% CrIs <0.01-0.49 vs. OR 0.32; 95% CrIs 0.10-0.36).
CONCLUSIONS
Bb-12/B94 could reduce NEC risk with a different size effect according to feeding type. Of note, most probiotic strains are evaluated in few trials and relatively small populations, and outcome data according to feeding type are not available for all RCTs. Further trials are needed to confirm the present findings.
Topics: Databases, Factual; Enterocolitis, Necrotizing; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Newborn, Diseases; Infant, Premature; Lactobacillus acidophilus; Male; Middle Aged; Network Meta-Analysis; Probiotics
PubMed: 33435456
DOI: 10.3390/nu13010192 -
Progress in Neuro-psychopharmacology &... Jun 2021In recent decades, the diagnostic and therapeutic implications of the microbiome changes and the impact of probiotic supplementation have increased rapidly. However, the...
OBJECTIVES
In recent decades, the diagnostic and therapeutic implications of the microbiome changes and the impact of probiotic supplementation have increased rapidly. However, the potential for clinical translation of microbiome research for children and adolescents with psychiatric disorders is unclear. This review examined available evidence related to gut microbiota as well as the impact of probiotic supplementation on psychiatric disorders in the pediatric population reported to date.
METHODS
We performed a literature search for the gut microbiota in child and adolescent population (0-18 years old) with mental health disorders from July 1999 through July 2019 in several databases: ClinicalTrials.gov, Ovid EBM Reviews, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, Ovid PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science.
RESULTS
A total of 7 studies met inclusion criteria consisting of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that examined various associations between psychiatric disorders and gut microbiota in youth. Six studies examined the effects of various treatment interventions such as probiotic supplementation on microbiota composition and behaviors. One study showed an increase in prosocial behavior in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and an increase in the Lachnospiraceae family following prebiotic supplementation. Another study suggested that prebiotic supplementation increased bifidobacterial populations for ASD and healthy controls. A study evaluating infant supplementation of prebiotics showed both a decreased likelihood of developing Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) or ASD and decreased gut Bifidobacterium. One study did not find significant differences in microbiome composition after micronutrient treatment.
CONCLUSION
The main goal of this systematic review was to comprehensively examine and summarize the current evidence focused on the potential effect of the relationship between microbiota gut composition as well as the effects of probiotic supplementation on psychiatric disorders in children and adolescents. This is a relatively new area of research and the number of included studies is limited. More studies are needed to determine whether gut dysbiosis leads to the development and/or contributes to the severity of mental disorders or whether gut dysbiosis is a result of other processes that accompany mental disorders.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE
A better understanding of the specific bacteria contributions, gut-brain pathways, and role in pathophysiological mechanisms in neuropsychiatric disorders in the child and adolescent populations can possibly provide alternative tools for a clinical psychiatrist. Moreover, it may ultimately aid the clinician with intervention strategies, or detect populations at risk for developing neuropsychiatric disorders.
Topics: Adolescent; Brain-Gut Axis; Child; Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Humans; Mental Disorders; Probiotics
PubMed: 33271210
DOI: 10.1016/j.pnpbp.2020.110187 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2021Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with a range of adverse pregnancy outcomes for mother and infant. The prevention of GDM using lifestyle interventions... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with a range of adverse pregnancy outcomes for mother and infant. The prevention of GDM using lifestyle interventions has proven difficult. The gut microbiome (the composite of bacteria present in the intestines) influences host inflammatory pathways, glucose and lipid metabolism and, in other settings, alteration of the gut microbiome has been shown to impact on these host responses. Probiotics are one way of altering the gut microbiome but little is known about their use in influencing the metabolic environment of pregnancy. This is an update of a review last published in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To systematically assess the effects of probiotic supplements used either alone or in combination with pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions on the prevention of GDM.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (20 March 2020), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and cluster-randomised trials comparing the use of probiotic supplementation with either placebo or diet for the prevention of the development of GDM. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. Quasi-randomised and cross-over design studies were not eligible for inclusion in this review. Studies presented only as abstracts with no subsequent full report of study results were only included if study authors confirmed that data in the abstract came from the final analysis. Otherwise, the abstract was left awaiting classification.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. Data were checked for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
In this update, we included seven trials with 1647 participants. Two studies were in overweight and obese women, two in obese women and three did not exclude women based on their weight. All included studies compared probiotics with placebo. The included studies were at low risk of bias overall except for one study that had an unclear risk of bias. We excluded two studies, eight studies were ongoing and three studies are awaiting classification. Six included studies with 1440 participants evaluated the risk of GDM. It is uncertain if probiotics have any effect on the risk of GDM compared to placebo (mean risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54 to 1.20; 6 studies, 1440 women; low-certainty evidence). The evidence was low certainty due to substantial heterogeneity and wide CIs that included both appreciable benefit and appreciable harm. Probiotics increase the risk of pre-eclampsia compared to placebo (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.29; 4 studies, 955 women; high-certainty evidence) and may increase the risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.01, 4 studies, 955 women), although the CIs for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy also indicated probiotics may have no effect. There were few differences between groups for other primary outcomes. Probiotics make little to no difference in the risk of caesarean section (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.17; 6 studies, 1520 women; high-certainty evidence), and probably make little to no difference in maternal weight gain during pregnancy (MD 0.30 kg, 95% CI -0.67 to 1.26; 4 studies, 853 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Probiotics probably make little to no difference in the incidence of large-for-gestational age infants (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.36; 4 studies, 919 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) and may make little to no difference in neonatal adiposity (2 studies, 320 infants; data not pooled; low-certainty evidence). One study reported adiposity as fat mass (MD -0.04 kg, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.04), and one study reported adiposity as percentage fat (MD -0.10%, 95% CI -1.19 to 0.99). We do not know the effect of probiotics on perinatal mortality (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.02; 3 studies, 709 infants; low-certainty evidence), a composite measure of neonatal morbidity (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.35; 2 studies, 623 infants; low-certainty evidence), or neonatal hypoglycaemia (mean RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.92; 2 studies, 586 infants; low-certainty evidence). No included studies reported on perineal trauma, postnatal depression, maternal and infant development of diabetes or neurosensory disability.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low-certainty evidence from six trials has not clearly identified the effect of probiotics on the risk of GDM. However, high-certainty evidence suggests there is an increased risk of pre-eclampsia with probiotic administration. There were no other clear differences between probiotics and placebo among the other primary outcomes. The certainty of evidence for this review's primary outcomes ranged from low to high, with downgrading due to concerns about substantial heterogeneity between studies, wide CIs and low event rates. Given the risk of harm and little observed benefit, we urge caution in using probiotics during pregnancy. The apparent effect of probiotics on pre-eclampsia warrants particular consideration. Eight studies are currently ongoing, and we suggest that these studies take particular care in follow-up and examination of the effect on pre-eclampsia and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. In addition, the underlying potential physiology of the relationship between probiotics and pre-eclampsia risk should be considered.
Topics: Bias; Cesarean Section; Diabetes, Gestational; Female; Humans; Obesity; Overweight; Placebos; Pre-Eclampsia; Pregnancy; Probiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 33870484
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009951.pub3 -
International Journal of Molecular... Aug 2022Modifications in the microbiota caused by environmental and genetic reasons can unbalance the intestinal homeostasis, deregulating the host's metabolism and immune... (Review)
Review
Modifications in the microbiota caused by environmental and genetic reasons can unbalance the intestinal homeostasis, deregulating the host's metabolism and immune system, intensifying the risk factors for the development and aggravation of non-alcoholic fat liver disease (NAFLD). The use of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics have been considered a potential and promising strategy to regulate the gut microbiota and produce beneficial effects in patients with liver conditions. For this reason, this review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of probiotics, prebiotics, and symbiotics in patients with NAFLD and NASH. Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were consulted, and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines were followed. The clinical trials used in this study demonstrated that gut microbiota interventions could improve a wide range of markers of inflammation, glycemia, insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, obesity, liver injury (decrease of hepatic enzymes and steatosis and fibrosis). Although microbiota modulators do not play a healing role, they can work as an important adjunct therapy in pathological processes involving NAFLD and its spectrums, either by improving the intestinal barrier or by preventing the formation of toxic metabolites for the liver or by acting on the immune system.
Topics: Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Humans; Liver; Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease; Prebiotics; Probiotics; Synbiotics
PubMed: 35955942
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23158805 -
Clinical Nutrition ESPEN Dec 2022Treatments for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) symptoms include pharmaceutical, surgical, dietary, and lifestyle behaviors; however, dietary interventions lack... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
What is the efficacy of dietary, nutraceutical, and probiotic interventions for the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Treatments for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) symptoms include pharmaceutical, surgical, dietary, and lifestyle behaviors; however, dietary interventions lack evidence synthesis.
RESEARCH QUESTION
What is the effect of dietary, probiotic, and nutraceutical interventions on GERD symptoms, with or without pharmaceutical therapy, in adults with a history of GERD or functional dyspepsia compared to no intervention, placebo, or usual care?
METHOD
A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA. The search strategy was implemented in MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and Embase on the 28th October 2020 and updated to 27th July 2021. Intervention studies were eligible if they evaluated the effect of a dietary, nutraceutical, or probiotic intervention on GERD symptoms in adults with a history of GERD or functional dyspepsia. The internal validity of studies was assessed using the Academy Quality Criteria Checklist; Review Manager software was used to perform meta-analysis; and certainty in the body of evidence was assessed using GRADE.
RESULTS
6,608 study records were retrieved from the search, with 21 studies (n = 24 highly heterogenous intervention groups) included (n = 10 restrictive dietary interventions; n = 3 non-restrictive dietary interventions; n = 8 nutraceutical interventions; and n = 3 probiotic interventions). GERD symptoms were clinically and statistically improved by a test-based elimination diet (n = 1 study), low nickel diet (n = 1 study), probiotic yoghurt (n = 1 study), psyllium husk (n = 1 study), prickly pear and olive leaf extract supplement (n = 1 study), and melatonin, amino acid and b-group vitamin supplement (n = 1 study) according to qualitative synthesis. Ginger-containing supplements could be meta-analyzed, and improved incidence of GERD symptom alleviation (n = 2 studies, OR: 7.50 [95%CI: 3.62-15.54], GRADE: high). No clinically and/or statistically significant effects were found for the remaining n = 16 highly heterogenous interventions.
CONCLUSION
Evidence to guide the dietary management of GERD symptoms is limited in scope, quality, and feasibility. Based on the limited evidence available, dietary GERD management should be long-term, individualized, and consider both dietary restrictions and/or additions.
PROSPERO ID
CRD42021224082.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Dyspepsia; Probiotics; Gastroesophageal Reflux; Dietary Supplements; Diet; Pharmaceutical Preparations
PubMed: 36513474
DOI: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2022.09.015 -
Nutrients Mar 2023Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is prevalent with lasting health implications for the mother and offspring. Medical therapy is the foundation of GDM management, for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is prevalent with lasting health implications for the mother and offspring. Medical therapy is the foundation of GDM management, for achieving optimal glycemic control often requires treatment with insulin or metformin. Gut dysbiosis is a feature of GDM pregnancies, therefore, dietary manipulation of the gut microbiota may offer a new avenue for management. Probiotics are a relatively new intervention, which can reduce the mother's blood sugar levels and, furthermore, adjust glucose and lipid metabolism in both mother and offspring.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to explore the effect of probiotics/synbiotics on glucose and lipid metabolism in women with GDM.
METHODS
A systematic search of the literature was conducted using the electronic databases Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, and EBOSCO, published between 1 January 2012 and 1 November 2022. A total of 11 randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) were analyzed. The indicators included fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting serum insulin (FSI), the homoeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI), total cholesterol (TC), HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and triglycerides (TG), the mean weight at end of trial, and gestational weight gain (GWG).
RESULTS
Compared with the placebo, probiotics/synbiotics were associated with a statistically significant improvement in FPG (MD = -2.33, 95% CI = -4.27, -0.40, = 0.02), FSI (MD = -2.47 95% CI = -3.82, -1.12, = 0.0003), HOMA-IR (MD = -0.40, 95% CI = -0.74, -0.06, = 0.02), and TC (MD = -6.59, 95% CI = -12.23,--0.95, = 0.02), while other factors had no significant difference. The subgroup analysis revealed that the kind of supplement led to heterogeneity for FPG and FSI, while heterogeneity was not found for others.
CONCLUSION
Probiotics/synbiotics could control glucose and lipid metabolism in pregnant women with GDM. There was a significant improvement in FPG, FSI, HOMA-IR, and TC. The use of specific probiotic supplementation may be a promising prevention and therapeutic strategy for GDM. However, due to the heterogeneity among existing studies, further studies are warranted to address the limitations of existing evidence and better inform the management of GDM.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Diabetes, Gestational; Synbiotics; Glucose; Blood Glucose; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Probiotics; Insulin; Insulin Resistance; Cholesterol, HDL; Lipid Metabolism
PubMed: 36986107
DOI: 10.3390/nu15061375 -
Acta Paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) Feb 2024This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials that employed probiotics and symbiotics for treating infantile colic. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials that employed probiotics and symbiotics for treating infantile colic.
METHODS
We performed electronic systematic literature searches in Embase, PubMed and Web of Science, to identify articles published between 1950 and April 2023. Only RCT involving infants with infantile colic under 3 months were included. The treatment plan comprised 15 probiotics, which included Lactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938 and Bifidobacterium animalis lactis BB-12. The probiotics were administered alone or in combination with a prebiotic, vs. no intervention or a placebo.
RESULTS
Probiotics resulted in an average reduction of 51 min of crying per day (p = 0.001). Further analysis of subgroups showed that the reduction was -39.30 min for vaginal delivery (p = 0.003), -64.66 min for Lactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938 (p = 0.03), -40.45 min for other strains (p < 0.00001), -74.28 min for exclusively breastfed infants (p = 0.0003) and -48.04 min for mixed feeding (p < 0.00001).
CONCLUSION
All probiotic strains seem effective in treating infantile colic. Exclusively breastfed infants have demonstrated more significant reduction in crying time. However, the available evidence on the effectiveness of probiotics in formula-fed and caesarean-born infants is limited.
Topics: Infant; Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Colic; Breast Feeding; Probiotics; Emotions; Prebiotics; Limosilactobacillus reuteri
PubMed: 37962097
DOI: 10.1111/apa.17036 -
Journal of Alternative and... Feb 2021Broad-spectrum antibiotics are the first-line treatment for small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO). However, many antibiotics have a considerable side-effect...
Broad-spectrum antibiotics are the first-line treatment for small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO). However, many antibiotics have a considerable side-effect profile and SIBO commonly reoccurs after successful eradication with antibiotics. Alternative therapies such as probiotics, therapeutic diets, and herbal medicines have been used to individualize SIBO management, particularly in recalcitrant cases. The objective of this review is to evaluate the role of alternative therapies in SIBO treatment. EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register were systematically searched for clinical studies evaluating alternative therapies in the management of SIBO. Human studies in which an alternative intervention was used to treat SIBO were included. Alternative interventions were defined as an intervention that included a probiotic supplement, herbal preparation, or a dietary change. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), nonrandomized clinical trials with or without a control, and crossover studies were included. The following information was extracted from the selected studies: study type, study participants, SIBO subtype, intervention, comparison, outcome measures, relevant results, relevant side effects, and Jadad score. Eight studies met inclusion criteria. The studies evaluated probiotics ( = 5), therapeutic diet ( = 1), and herbal medicines ( = 2). Among these studies, there were four RCTs, two open-label single-arm studies, one randomized, double-blind crossover study, and one two-arm open-label study with crossover. Main results are summarized. There may be studies not captured by the defined search criteria. Additionally, studies used different methodologies in both breath testing and measurement of clinical symptoms, making it difficult to draw conclusions on SIBO eradication and symptom improvement across studies. Our findings suggest preliminary evidence for a role of alternative therapies in the treatment of SIBO. However, robust clinical trials are generally lacking. Existing studies tend to be small and lack standardized formulations of treatment. Breath testing protocols and clinical symptom measurement greatly varied between studies. Large-scale, randomized, placebo-controlled trials are needed to further evaluate the best way to utilize alternative therapies in the treatment of SIBO.
Topics: Blind Loop Syndrome; Diet Therapy; Humans; Phytotherapy; Probiotics
PubMed: 33074705
DOI: 10.1089/acm.2020.0275 -
Nutrients Oct 2022This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine if probiotic supplementation in pregnancy reduced maternal Group B streptococcus (GBS) recto-vaginal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine if probiotic supplementation in pregnancy reduced maternal Group B streptococcus (GBS) recto-vaginal colonization in pregnant women at 35-37 weeks of gestation. Electronic databases (i.e., PubMed, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane Library) were searched from inception up to February 2022. We included RCTs assessing the effects of probiotic supplementation in pregnancy on GBS recto-vaginal colonization. The primary outcome was GBS-positive recto-vaginal cultures performed at 35-37 weeks of gestation. Secondarily, we evaluated obstetric and short-term neonatal outcomes. A total of 132 publications were identified; 9 full-length articles were reviewed to finally include 5 studies. Probiotic supplementation reduced vaginal GBS colonization: the GBS positive culture rate was estimated at 31.9% (96/301) in the intervention group compared to 38.6% (109/282) in the control group (OR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.40-0.94, I2 4.8%, = 0.38). The treatment started after 30 weeks of gestation and was more effective in reducing GBS colonization (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.21-0.78, I2 0%, = 0.55). Probiotic administration during pregnancy, namely in the third trimester, was associated with a reduced GBS recto-vaginal colonization at 35-37 weeks and a safe perinatal profile. Whether this new strategy could reduce the exposition of pregnant women to significant doses of antibiotics in labor needs to be evaluated in other trials.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Female; Pregnancy; Humans; Pregnant Women; Streptococcal Infections; Streptococcus agalactiae; Vagina; Probiotics; Pregnancy Complications, Infectious
PubMed: 36364782
DOI: 10.3390/nu14214520