-
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 -
Allergologia Et Immunopathologia 2022The purpose of this meta-analysis is to systematically evaluate the efficacy of probiotics on allergic rhinitis (AR). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this meta-analysis is to systematically evaluate the efficacy of probiotics on allergic rhinitis (AR).
METHODS
Collecting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with probiotics as intervention measures for AR, two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted the data and evaluated the methodological quality of the included studies, and used RevMan 5.3 software for meta-analysis to observe the effects of probiotics on Rhinitis Quality of Life (RQLQ) scores, Rhinitis Total Symptom Scores (RTSS), blood eosinophil count, total and antigen-specific serum immunoglobulin E (IgE) levels by using the fixed- or the random-effects model to calculate the pooled risk for significant heterogeneity.
RESULTS
A total of 2708 patients were included in 30 RCTs. Meta-analysis results showed that the RQLQ global scores (mean difference [MD] = -9.43; P < 0.00001), RQLQ nasal scores (MD = -1.52; P = 0.03), and RTSS nasal scores (MD = -1.96; P = 0.02) significantly improved in the probiotic group when compared with those in the placebo group. There was no significant difference in blood eosinophil count (MD = -0.09; P=0.82), RQLQ eye scores (MD = -1.45; P = 0.07), RTSS global scores (MD = -2.24; P = 0.26), RTSS eye scores (MD = -0.39; P = 0.31), total and antigen-specific serum IgE levels (MD = -0.04; P = 0.7 and MD = -0.08; P = 0.81) between the probiotic and the placebo group.
CONCLUSION
Compared with the placebo group, the quality of life and symptoms of patients with AR significantly improved in the probiotic group, thus providing a new potential method for the application of probiotics in AR. However, because of the limited evidence for the current study outcomes, the heterogeneity of research, and the differences in research results, more high-quality studies are needed to in the future.
Topics: Humans; Immunoglobulin E; Probiotics; Quality of Life; Rhinitis; Rhinitis, Allergic
PubMed: 35527653
DOI: 10.15586/aei.v50i3.507 -
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 -
Journal of Global Health May 2023Probiotics are non-invasive therapies composed of live bacteria and yeast. Administration of prebiotics improved the health status of pregnant and lactating women, as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Probiotics are non-invasive therapies composed of live bacteria and yeast. Administration of prebiotics improved the health status of pregnant and lactating women, as well as newborns. This review aimed to appraise the evidence concerning the effectiveness of probiotics on the mental health of pregnant women, lactating mother and the microbiota of the newborn.
METHODS
This systematic review and meta-analysis ascertained quantitative studies published in Medline (PubMed), Clinical Key, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Cochrane Library, and Google scholar. Two authors independently screened and extracted the data from the primary studies that analysed the efficacy of probiotics on the mental health of pregnant and lactating women and the microbiota of the newborn. We adopted Cochrane Collaboration guidelines and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. The qualities of included trials were assessed by Cochrane collaboration's risk of bias tool (ROB-2).
RESULTS
Sixteen trials comprised 946 pregnant women, 524 were lactating mothers, and 1678 were infants. The sample size of primary studies ranged from 36 to 433. Probiotics were administered as interventions, using either a single strain of Bifidobacterium or Lactobacillus or a double-strain combination of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium. Probiotics supplementation reduced anxiety in pregnant (n = 676, standardised mean difference (SMD) = 0.01; 95% confidence interval (CI) = -0.28,0.30, P = 0.04, I = 70) and lactating women (n = 514, SMD = -0.17; 95% CI = -1.62,1.27, P = 0.98, I = 0). Similarly, probiotics decreased depression in pregnant (n = 298, SMD = 0.05; 95% CI = -0.24,0.35, P = 0.20, I = 40) and lactating women (n = 518, SMD = -0.10; 95% CI = -1.29,-1.05, P = 0.11, I = 60%). Similarly, probiotics supplementation improved the gut microbiota and reduced the duration of crying, abdominal distension, abdominal colic and diarrhoea.
CONCLUSION
Non-invasive probiotic therapies are more useful to pregnant and lactating women and newborns.
REGISTRATION
The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022372126).
Topics: Infant; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Female; Pregnancy; Depression; Lactation; Probiotics; Anxiety; Gastrointestinal Microbiome
PubMed: 37218177
DOI: 10.7189/jogh.13.04038 -
Maternal & Child Nutrition Jan 2022Infant regurgitation is common during infancy and can cause substantial parental distress. Regurgitation can lead to parental perception that their infant is in pain.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Infant regurgitation is common during infancy and can cause substantial parental distress. Regurgitation can lead to parental perception that their infant is in pain. Parents often present in general practitioner surgeries, community baby clinics and accident and emergency departments which can lead to financial burden on parents and the health care system. Probiotics are increasingly reported to have therapeutic effects for preventing and treating infant regurgitation. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of probiotic supplementation for the prevention and treatment of infant regurgitation. Literature searches were conducted using MEDLINE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. A meta-analysis was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration methodology where possible. Six RCTs examined the prevention or treatment with probiotics on infant regurgitation. A meta-analysis of three studies showed a statistically significant reduction in regurgitation episodes for the probiotic group compared to the placebo group (mean difference [MD]: -1.79 episodes/day: 95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.30 to -0.27, N = 560), but there was high heterogeneity (96%). Meta-analysis of two studies found a statistically significant increased number of stools per day in the probiotic group compared to the placebo group at 1 month of age (MD: 1.36, 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.73, N = 488), with moderate heterogeneity (69%). Meta-analysis of two studies showed no statistical difference in body weight between the two groups (MD: -91.88 g, 95% CI: 258.40-74.63: I = 23%, N = 112) with minimal heterogeneity 23%. Probiotic therapy appears promising for infant regurgitation with some evidence of benefit, but most studies are small and there was relatively high heterogeneity. The use of probiotics could potentially be a noninvasive, safe, cost effective, and preventative positive health strategy for both women and their babies. Further robust, well controlled RCTs examining the effect of probiotics for infant regurgitation are warranted.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant; Probiotics
PubMed: 34908230
DOI: 10.1111/mcn.13290 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2022Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis (HAEC) is a leading cause of serious morbidity and potential mortality in children with Hirschsprung's disease (HD). People with... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis (HAEC) is a leading cause of serious morbidity and potential mortality in children with Hirschsprung's disease (HD). People with HAEC suffer from intestinal inflammation, and present with diarrhoea, explosive stools, and abdominal distension. Probiotics are live microorganisms with beneficial health effects, which can optimise gastrointestinal function and gut flora. However, the efficacy and safety of probiotic supplementation in the prevention of HAEC remains unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of probiotic supplements used either alone or in combination with pharmacological interventions on the prevention of Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, the China BioMedical Literature database (CBM), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Chinese Clinical Trials Registry, Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, and Clinical Trials Registry-India, from database inception to 27 February 2022. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles and reviews for any additional trails.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics and placebo, or any other non-probiotic intervention, for the prevention of HAEC were eligible for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies; disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third review author. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
We included two RCTs, with a total of 122 participants. We judged the overall risk of bias as high. We downgraded the evidence due to risk of bias (random sequence generation, allocation concealment, and blinding) and small sample size. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of probiotics on the occurrence of HAEC (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.10 to 3.43; I² = 74%; 2 studies, 120 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We found one included study that did not measure serious adverse events and one included study that reported no serious adverse events related to probiotics. Probiotics may result in little to no difference between probiotics and placebo in relation to the severity of children with HAEC at Grade I (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.14 to 3.16; I² = 25%; 2 studies, 120 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effects of probiotics on the severity of HAEC at Grade II are very uncertain (OR 1.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 136.58; I² = 86%; 2 studies, 120 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Similarly, the evidence suggests that probiotics results in little to no difference in relation to the severity of HAEC at Grade III (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.05 to 3.45; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 120 participants; low-certainty evidence). No overall mortality or withdrawals due to adverse events were reported. Probiotics may result in little to no difference in the recurrence of episodes of HAEC compared to placebo (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.24 to 3.00; 1 study, 60 participants; low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is currently not enough evidence to assess the efficacy or safety of probiotics for the prevention of Hirschsprung-associated enterocolitis when compared with placebo. The presence of low- to very-low certainty evidence suggests that further well-designed and sufficiently powered RCTs are needed to clarify the true efficacy of probiotics.
Topics: Australia; Child; Diarrhea; Enterocolitis; Humans; Odds Ratio; Probiotics
PubMed: 35470864
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013714.pub2 -
Nutrition Reviews Feb 2023The safety and efficacy of probiotics during severe illness has been a subject of ongoing interest. The impact of probiotics can worsen nutritional status, which could... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
The safety and efficacy of probiotics during severe illness has been a subject of ongoing interest. The impact of probiotics can worsen nutritional status, which could potentially result in a deterioration of the patient's overall life-threatening status.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of probiotics in reducing intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired infections in adult critically ill patients.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and Cochrane library databases for the period 2011-2020 were searched.
DATA EXTRACTION
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) methodology was used to search for randomized controlled trials that evaluated the use of probiotics among critically ill patients.
DATA ANALYSIS
No significant difference was observed between probiotics and control groups in terms of the mortality rate (risk ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval .82 to 1.55, P = .46). Probiotics, however, provided a significant reduction in ICU-acquired infections (risk ratio .73, 95% confidence interval .58 to .93, P = .01).
CONCLUSION
The use of probiotics seems to play a role in decreasing the incidence of ICU-acquired infections. Also, a potential reduction in terms of the incidence of diarrhea has been reported, with no examples of adverse incidents, suggesting probiotics are safe.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Critical Illness; Probiotics; Diarrhea; Intensive Care Units
PubMed: 35985275
DOI: 10.1093/nutrit/nuac059 -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Apr 2021This systematic review aimed to synthesise the results from studies investigating the effects of prebiotics and probiotics on kynurenine pathway metabolism. Thirteen... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review aimed to synthesise the results from studies investigating the effects of prebiotics and probiotics on kynurenine pathway metabolism. Thirteen studies were identified for inclusion, comprising 12 probiotic and two prebiotic arms. Participants included healthy individuals and individuals with various clinical conditions. Twelve metabolites were examined across the studies, using a range of biological samples. Across all interventions, 11 reported an effect on ≤ metabolite. Although limited by clinical and methodological heterogeneity, pooled analysis (n = 253) found probiotics to significantly affect serum kynurenine (g = 0.315, CI = 0.070 to 0.560, p = 0.012, 4 studies, I = 0%) and the kynurenine:tryptophan ratio (g = 0.442, CI = 0.074 to 0.810, p = 0.018, 4 studies, I = 42 %). Risk of bias across the studies was generally low. The results provide preliminary evidence that probiotics can modulate kynurenine pathway metabolism, with less evidence available regarding prebiotics. Future studies which further consider methodological confounds and sample characteristics are required, to establish intervention efficacy. PROSPERO registration #CRD42019154677.
Topics: Humans; Kynurenine; Prebiotics; Probiotics; Tryptophan
PubMed: 33482244
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.12.026 -
European Journal of Pediatrics Jun 2022Sepsis due to the administered probiotic strain/s is a barrier against adoption of prophylactic probiotic supplementation in preterm infants to reduce the risk of... (Review)
Review
UNLABELLED
Sepsis due to the administered probiotic strain/s is a barrier against adoption of prophylactic probiotic supplementation in preterm infants to reduce the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC ≥ Stage II), all-cause mortality, late-onset sepsis, and feeding intolerance. We aimed to conduct a systematic review for reports of probiotic sepsis in preterm infants (gestation < 37 weeks). Databases including PubMed, Embase, Emcare, Cochrane Central library, and Google Scholar were searched in August 2021 and updated in Jan 2022. Probiotic sepsis was defined as positive blood/CSF culture isolating administered probiotic strain with symptoms suggestive of infection. Data collection included birth weight, gestation, comorbidities (e.g. gut surgery, NEC), presence of central venous catheters, treatment, and outcome. Literature search revealed 1569 studies. A total of 16 reports [randomised control trial (RCT): none; non-RCT: 1; case series: 8; case report: 7] involving 32 preterm infants with probiotic sepsis were included after exclusions for various reasons. Majority of the cases were born < 32 weeks' gestation. Bifidobacterium (N = 19) was the most commonly isolated organism followed by Lactobacillus (N = 10), and Saccharomyces (N = 3). A total of 25/32 cases were confirmed to be due to the administered probiotic strain on full genomic analysis. Two studies reported one neonatal death each. Twelve neonates had comorbidities. Majority were treated with antibiotics (29/32) whereas others (3/32) required antifungal treatment.
CONCLUSION
Probiotics sepsis is relatively an uncommon event in preterm infants. Majority of the cases recovered after antibiotic or antifungal treatment. The importance of optimal surveillance and treatment of probiotic sepsis and research towards alternatives to probiotics (e.g. postbiotics) is emphasised.
WHAT IS KNOWN
• Probiotics have been shown to reduce necrotising enterocolitis, late-onset sepsis, all-cause mortality, and time to reach full enteral feeds in preterm infants. • Despite the evidence, use of probiotics is not universal due to concerns regarding probiotic-associated sepsis in preterm infants.
WHAT IS NEW
• This comprehensive systematic review showed that probiotic sepsis is a relatively rare phenomenon in preterm infants. • All except one case where the diagnosis was uncertain recovered after antimicrobial therapy.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antifungal Agents; Enterocolitis, Necrotizing; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Probiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sepsis
PubMed: 35348825
DOI: 10.1007/s00431-022-04452-5