-
Gastroenterology Nov 2023Some probiotics may be beneficial in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but differences in species and strains used, as well as endpoints reported, have hampered attempts... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Some probiotics may be beneficial in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but differences in species and strains used, as well as endpoints reported, have hampered attempts to make specific recommendations as to which should be preferred. We updated our previous meta-analysis examining this issue.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched (up to March 2023). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults with IBS, comparing probiotics with placebo were eligible. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain a relative risk of global symptoms, abdominal pain, or abdominal bloating or distension persisting after therapy, with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Continuous data were pooled using a standardized mean difference with a 95% CI. Adverse events data were also pooled.
RESULTS
We identified 82 eligible trials, containing 10,332 patients. Only 24 RCTs were at low risk of bias across all domains. For global symptoms, there was moderate certainty in the evidence for a benefit of Escherichia strains, low certainty for Lactobacillus strains and Lactobacillus plantarum 299V, and very low certainty for combination probiotics, LacClean Gold S, Duolac 7s, and Bacillus strains. For abdominal pain, there was low certainty in the evidence for a benefit of Saccharomyces cerevisae I-3856 and Bifidobacterium strains, and very low certainty for combination probiotics, Lactobacillus, Saccharomyces, and Bacillus strains. For abdominal bloating or distension there was very low certainty in the evidence for a benefit of combination probiotics and Bacillus strains. The relative risk of experiencing any adverse event, in 55 trials, including more than 7000 patients, was not significantly higher with probiotics.
CONCLUSIONS
Some combinations of probiotics or strains may be beneficial in IBS. However, certainty in the evidence for efficacy by GRADE criteria was low to very low across almost all of our analyses.
Topics: Irritable Bowel Syndrome; Probiotics; Humans; Treatment Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Abdominal Pain; Gastrointestinal Microbiome
PubMed: 37541528
DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2023.07.018 -
Cancers Dec 2023Constipation is a common symptom in patients receiving antitumoral treatment. The mechanisms underlying antitumoral agent-induced constipation (ATAIC) are poorly... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Constipation is a common symptom in patients receiving antitumoral treatment. The mechanisms underlying antitumoral agent-induced constipation (ATAIC) are poorly defined. This systematic review aimed to analyze and synthesize the available information related to the prevalence, etiology, and treatment of ATAIC.
METHODS
A systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted. The review included human studies written in English, French, or Spanish involving patients with cancer and containing information about the prevalence, etiology, and treatment of ATAIC.
RESULTS
A total of 73 articles were included. The reported prevalence ranged from 0.8% to 86.6%. Six studies reported an ATAIC prevalence of over 50%. The prevalence rates of constipation of grades 3 and 4 ranged between 0 and 11%. The importance of enteric neuronal integrity in gastrointestinal function was reported. The articles with the highest levels of evidence in relation to ATAIC treatment obtained in this systematic review studied treatments with acupuncture, sweet potato, osteopath, probiotics, and moxibustion.
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of constipation in patients undergoing antitumoral treatment is very diverse. Studies specifically designed to report the prevalence of antineoplastic treatment-induced constipation are needed. The importance of enteric neuronal integrity in gastrointestinal function was described. Thus, neuroprotection could be an area of research for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced gastrointestinal disorders.
PubMed: 38201526
DOI: 10.3390/cancers16010099 -
Nutrition Reviews Jan 2024Despite recent advances in antidepressants in treating major depression (MDD), their usage is marred by adverse effects and social stigmas. Probiotics may be an...
CONTEXT
Despite recent advances in antidepressants in treating major depression (MDD), their usage is marred by adverse effects and social stigmas. Probiotics may be an efficacious adjunct or standalone treatment, potentially circumventing the aforementioned issues with antidepressants. However, there is a lack of head-to-head clinical trials between these 2 interventions.
OBJECTIVE
A systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy and acceptability of these 2 interventions in treating MDD.
DATA SOURCES
Six databases and registry platforms for the clinical trial were systematically searched to identify the eligible double-blinded, randomized controlled trials published between 2015 and 2022.
DATA EXACTION
Two authors selected independently the placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants and microbiota-targeted interventions (prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics) used for the treatment of MDD in adults (≥18 years old). Standardized mean differences (SMDs) of depressive symptom scores from individual trials were pooled for network meta-analysis (PROSPERO no. CRD42020222305).
RESULTS
Forty-two eligible trials covering 22 interventions were identified, of which 16 were found to be effective in MDD treatment and the certainty of evidence was moderate to very low. When all trials were considered, compared with placebo, SMDs of interventions ranged from -0.16 (95% credible interval: -0.30, -0.04) for venlafaxine to -0.81 (-1.06, -0.52) for escitalopram. Probiotics were superior to brexpiprazole (SMD [95% credible interval]: -0.42 [-0.68, -0.17]), cariprazine (-0.44 [-0.69, -0.24]), citalopram (-0.37 [-0.66, -0.07]), duloxetine (-0.26, [-0.51, -0.04]), desvenlafaxine (-0.38 [-0.63, -0.14]), ketamine (-0.32 [-0.66, -0.01]), venlafaxine (-0.47 [-0.73, -0.23]), vilazodone (-0.37 [-0.61, -0.12]), vortioxetine (-0.39 [-0.63, -0.15]), and placebo (-0.62 [-0.86, -0.42]), and were noninferior to other antidepressants. In addition, probiotics ranked the second highest in the treatment hierarchy after escitalopram. Long-term treatment (≥8 weeks) using probiotics showed the same tolerability as antidepressants.
CONCLUSION
Probiotics, compared with antidepressants and placebo, may be efficacious as an adjunct or standalone therapy for treating MDD.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration no. CRD42020222305.
PubMed: 38219239
DOI: 10.1093/nutrit/nuad171 -
Pediatric Research Dec 2023Bifidobacterium infantis has special abilities to utilise human milk oligosaccharides. Hence we hypothesised that probiotic supplements containing B. infantis may confer... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Bifidobacterium infantis has special abilities to utilise human milk oligosaccharides. Hence we hypothesised that probiotic supplements containing B. infantis may confer greater benefits to preterm infants than probiotic supplements without B. infantis.
METHODS
A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted according to standard guidelines. We selected RCTs evaluating probiotics compared to placebo or no treatment in preterm and/or low birth weight infants. Probiotic effects on Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC), Late Onset Sepsis (LOS) and Mortality were analysed separately for RCTs in which the supplemented probiotic product contained B. infantis and those that did not contain B. infantis.
RESULTS
67 RCTs were included (n = 14,606), of which 16 used probiotics containing B. infantis (Subgroup A) and 51 RCTs did not (Subgroup B) Meta-analysis of all RCTs indicated that probiotics reduced the risk of NEC, LOS, and mortality. The subgroup meta-analysis demonstrated greater reduction in the incidence of NEC in subgroup A than subgroup B [(relative risk in subgroup A: 0.38; 95% CI, 0.27-0.55) versus (0.67; 95% CI, 0.55-0.81) in subgroup B; p value for subgroup difference: 0.01].
CONCLUSIONS
These results provide indirect evidence that probiotic supplements that include B. infantis may be more beneficial for preterm infants. Well-designed RCTs are necessary to confirm these findings.
IMPACT
Evidence is emerging that beneficial effects of probiotics are species and strain specific. This systematic review analyses if B. infantis supplementation provides an advantage to preterm infants. This is the first systematic review evaluating the effects of probiotics containing B. infantis in preterm infants. The results of this systematic review provides indirect evidence that probiotics that include B. infantis may be more beneficial for preterm infants. These results will help in guiding future research and clinical practice for using B. infantis as a probiotic in preterm infants.
Topics: Infant; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Infant, Premature; Bifidobacterium longum subspecies infantis; Probiotics; Dietary Supplements; Infant, Low Birth Weight; Enterocolitis, Necrotizing; Sepsis
PubMed: 37460707
DOI: 10.1038/s41390-023-02716-w -
Evidence-based Dentistry Sep 2023This study was a systematic review conducted in accordance with the Transparent Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A literature... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
DATA SOURCES
This study was a systematic review conducted in accordance with the Transparent Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A literature search was undertaken using eleven databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Sciences, The Cochrane Library, Ovid, Scopus, Sinomed, Sciencedirect, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang and Technology Periodicals Database (VIP). Additional studies were identified by searching the references of these studies. The search time was from inception to April 2022.
STUDY SELECTION
The population, intervention, comparison and outcomes were considered. The level of evidence was limited to relevant randomised control trials (RCT) that answered the questions defined in this review.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Screening of eligible studies was conducted by two independent reviewers. Data was extracted using a standardised form which included information about the type of research, population, sample size of experimental group and control group, outcome measurements and results. Bias risk and evidence quality assessment were also assessed. Where appropriate, standard meta-analysis techniques were used to pool study results. The statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan5.4 software and the Stata16. Sensitivity analysis was performed on the combined analysis results.
RESULTS
A total of 17 RCTs were identified to meet the eligibility criteria. The trials lasted between 2 and 24 weeks and were published after 2000. The studies encompassed 3781 preschool children divided into an experimental group (n = 2047) and a control group (n = 1734). The meta-analysis highlighted that incidence of dental caries could be prevented by probiotics. Caries incidence in preschool children was reduced in the Lactobacillus rhamnosus group. Streptococcus Mutans (S.mutans) count in saliva could be reduced however, probiotics could not reduce the number of S.mutans in dental plaque.
CONCLUSIONS
The authors conclude that probiotics could prevent dental caries. Lactobacillus rhamnosus was identified as the more effective than other probiotics to reduce dental caries in preschool children.
Topics: Child, Preschool; Humans; China; Control Groups; Databases, Factual; Dental Caries; Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus; Probiotics
PubMed: 37670134
DOI: 10.1038/s41432-023-00918-z -
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition Sep 2023Gut dysbiosis is associated with sepsis and necrotizing enterocolitis in preterm infants, which can adversely affect long-term growth and neurodevelopment. We aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Gut dysbiosis is associated with sepsis and necrotizing enterocolitis in preterm infants, which can adversely affect long-term growth and neurodevelopment. We aimed to synthesise evidence for the effect of probiotic supplementation on growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes in preterm infants. MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and grey literature were searched in February 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Meta-analysis was performed using random effects model. Effect sizes were expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD), mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Risk of Bias (ROB) was assessed using the ROB-2 tool. Certainty of Evidence (CoE) was summarized using GRADE guidelines. Thirty RCTs (n = 4817) were included. Meta-analysis showed that probiotic supplementation was associated with better short-term weight gain [SMD 0.24 (95%CI 0.04, 0.44); 22 RCTs (n = 3721); p = 0.02; I = 88%; CoE: low]. However, length [SMD 0.12 (95%CI -0.13, 0.36); 7 RCTs, (n = 899); p = 0.35; I = 69%; CoE: low] and head circumference [SMD 0.09 (95%CI -0.15, 0.34); 8 RCTs (n = 1132); p = 0.46; I = 76%; CoE: low] were similar between the probiotic and placebo groups. Probiotic supplementation had no effect on neurodevelopmental impairment [RR 0.91 (95%CI 0.76, 1.08); 5 RCTs (n = 1556); p = 0.27; I = 0%; CoE: low]. Probiotic supplementation was associated with better short-term weight gain, but did not affect length, head circumference, long-term growth, and neurodevelopmental outcomes of preterm infants. Adequately powered RCTs are needed in this area. Prospero Registration: CRD42020064992.
Topics: Infant; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Infant, Premature; Dietary Supplements; Probiotics; Sepsis; Weight Gain
PubMed: 36788356
DOI: 10.1038/s41430-023-01270-2 -
Journal of Translational Medicine Aug 2023This paper aimed to examine the effects of probiotics on eight factors in overweight or obese children by meta-analysis, namely, body mass index (BMI), total cholesterol... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This paper aimed to examine the effects of probiotics on eight factors in overweight or obese children by meta-analysis, namely, body mass index (BMI), total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), adiponectin, leptin and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and summarize the mechanisms of action of probiotics based on the existing researches.
METHODS
Six databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, SinoMed and CNKI) were searched until March 2023. Review Manager 5.4 was used for meta-analysis. The data were analysed using weighted mean differences (WMDs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) under a fixed effect model or random effect model to observe the effects of probiotic administration on the included indicators.
RESULTS
Four publications with a total of 206 overweight or obesity children were included. According to the meta-analysis, probiotics were able to significantly decrease the levels of HDL-C (MD, 0.06; 95% CI 0.03, 0.09; P = 0.0001), LDL-C (MD, - 0.06; 95% CI - 0.12, - 0.00; P = 0.04), adiponectin (MD, 1.39; 95% CI 1.19, 1.59; P < 0.00001), leptin (MD, - 2.72; 95% CI - 2.9, - 2.54; P < 0.00001) and TNF-α (MD, - 4.91; 95% CI - 7.15, - 2.67; P < 0.0001) compared to those in the placebo group. Still, for BMI, the palcebo group seemed to be better than the probiotic group (MD, 0.85; 95% CI 0.04, 1.66; P = 0.04). TC (MD, - 0.05; 95% CI - 0.12, 0.02; P = 0.14) and TG (MD, - 0.16; 95% CI - 0.36, 0.05; P = 0.14) were not different between two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
This review drew that probiotics might act as a role in regulating HDL-C, LDL-C, adiponectin, leptin and TNF-α in overweight or obesity children. Additionally, our systematic review yielded that probiotics might regulate lipid metabolism and improve obese associated symptoms by some paths. This meta-analysis has been registered at PROSPERO with ID: CRD42023408359.
Topics: Humans; Child; Overweight; Leptin; Pediatric Obesity; Cholesterol, LDL; Adiponectin; Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha; Probiotics; Triglycerides; Cholesterol, HDL
PubMed: 37542325
DOI: 10.1186/s12967-023-04319-9 -
Medicine Nov 2023Depression affects millions globally and often coexists with cognitive deficits. This study explored the potential of probiotics in enhancing cognition and ameliorating... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Depression affects millions globally and often coexists with cognitive deficits. This study explored the potential of probiotics in enhancing cognition and ameliorating depressive symptoms in major depressive disorder patients.
METHODS
Utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol and the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study design framework, we systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials examining probiotic effects on cognition and depressive symptoms. Searches spanned 7 databases from January 2010 to May 2022. Risk of bias was assessed using Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0, and meta-analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.4.1. Publication bias was evaluated via Egger test.
RESULTS
In a systematic review on the effects of probiotic supplementation on cognition and depressive symptoms in depression patients, 635 records were initially identified, with 4 studies ultimately included. These randomized controlled trials were conducted across diverse regions, primarily involving females, with assessment periods ranging from 1 to 2 months. Concerning cognitive outcomes, a statistically significant moderate improvement was found with probiotic supplementation, based on the mean difference and its 95% confidence interval. However, for depressive symptoms, the overall effect was negligible and not statistically significant. A heterogeneity test indicated consistent findings across studies for both cognitive and depressive outcomes (I² = 0% for both). The potential for publication bias was evaluated using the Egger linear regression test, suggesting no significant bias, though caution is advised due to the limited number of studies.
CONCLUSION
Probiotics may enhance cognitive domains and mitigate depressive symptoms, emphasizing the gut-brain axis role. However, methodological variations and brief intervention durations call for more standardized, extensive research.
Topics: Female; Humans; Depressive Disorder, Major; Depression; Probiotics; Cognition; Research Design
PubMed: 38013351
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000036005 -
BMC Medicine Jul 2023Probiotics are often used to prevent antibiotic-induced low-diversity dysbiosis, however their effect is not yet sufficiently summarized in this regard. We aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Probiotics are often used to prevent antibiotic-induced low-diversity dysbiosis, however their effect is not yet sufficiently summarized in this regard. We aimed to investigate the effects of concurrent probiotic supplementation on gut microbiome composition during antibiotic therapy.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials reporting the differences in gut microbiome diversity between patients on antibiotic therapy with and without concomitant probiotic supplementation. The systematic search was performed in three databases (MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)) without filters on 15 October 2021. A random-effects model was used to estimate pooled mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). This review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021282983).
RESULTS
Of 11,769 identified articles, 15 were eligible in the systematic review and 5 in the meta-analyses. Quantitative data synthesis for Shannon (MD = 0.23, 95% CI: [(-)0.06-0.51]), Chao1 (MD = 11.59 [(-)18.42-41.60]) and observed OTUs (operational taxonomic unit) (MD = 17.15 [(-)9.43-43.73]) diversity indices revealed no significant difference between probiotic supplemented and control groups. Lacking data prevented meta-analyzing other diversity indices; however, most of the included studies reported no difference in the other reported α- and ß-diversity indices between the groups. Changes in the taxonomic composition varied across the eligible studies but tended to be similar in both groups. However, they showed a potential tendency to restore baseline levels in both groups after 3-8 weeks. This is the first meta-analysis and the most comprehensive review of the topic to date using high quality methods. The limited number of studies and low sample sizes are the main limitations of our study. Moreover, there was high variability across the studies regarding the indication of antibiotic therapy and the type, dose, and duration of antimicrobials and probiotics.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results showed that probiotic supplementation during antibiotic therapy was not found to be influential on gut microbiome diversity indices. Defining appropriate microbiome diversity indices, their standard ranges, and their clinical relevance would be crucial.
Topics: Humans; Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Probiotics; Dietary Supplements; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Dysbiosis
PubMed: 37468916
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-023-02961-0 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Dec 2023Anxiety can adversely affect human well-being. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of interventions that alter the gut microbes (including probiotics,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Anxiety can adversely affect human well-being. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of interventions that alter the gut microbes (including probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics) on anxiety.
METHODS
A systematic meta-analysis of the effects of probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics on anxiety was conducted by searching randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in 13 databases. The primary outcomes were the pre- and post-intervention anxiety scores in the intervention and placebo groups. Anxiety scores were extracted as standard mean differences (SMDs) and pooled based on a random effects model. Subgroup analyses of anxiety scales, health status, gastrointestinal symptoms, flora strains, treatment type, probiotic dose, region, and treatment duration were also performed.
RESULTS
29 RCTs (2035 participants) were included, revealing that both probiotics and synbiotics significantly reduced anxiety scores. Additionally, anxiety scores did not significantly reduce when comparing prebiotics and placebos.
LIMITATIONS
Owing to the small combined effect size of probiotic/prebiotic/synbiotic treatments and the relatively few studies on prebiotics and synbiotics included in the analysis, the findings of probiotic/prebiotic/synbiotic treatments are preliminary.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study indicated that probiotics and synbiotics can reduce anxiety scores; however, it might be premature to conclude their clinical efficacy in alleviating anxiety due to the small effect size. There is no consensus regarding the optimal dose, treatment duration, treatment type, or probiotic strain to improve anxiety. Moreover, the mechanisms by which probiotics and synbiotics improve anxiety remain unclear. More RCTs are needed to determine the mechanisms of action and to identify appropriate markers to clarify their effects.
Topics: Humans; Synbiotics; Prebiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Probiotics; Anxiety
PubMed: 37734624
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.09.018