-
Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and... Dec 2021Gut microbiota dysbiosis and sarcopenia commonly occur in the elderly. Although the concept of the gut-muscle axis has been raised, the casual relationship is still... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Gut microbiota dysbiosis and sarcopenia commonly occur in the elderly. Although the concept of the gut-muscle axis has been raised, the casual relationship is still unclear. This systematic review analyses the current evidence of gut microbiota effects on muscle/sarcopenia.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library databases using the keywords (microbiota* OR microbiome*) AND (sarcopen* OR muscle). Studies reporting the alterations of gut microbiota and muscle/physical performance were analysed.
RESULTS
A total of 26 pre-clinical and 10 clinical studies were included. For animal studies, three revealed age-related changes and relationships between gut microbiota and muscle. Three studies focused on muscle characteristics of germ-free mice. Seventy-five per cent of eight faecal microbiota transplantation studies showed that the recipient mice successfully replicated the muscle phenotype of donors. There were positive effects on muscle from seven probiotics, two prebiotics, and short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs). Ten studies investigated on other dietary supplements, antibiotics, exercise, and food withdrawal that affected both muscle and gut microbiota. Twelve studies explored the potential mechanisms of the gut-muscle axis. For clinical studies, 6 studies recruited 676 elderly people (72.8 ± 5.6 years, 57.8% female), while 4 studies focused on 244 young adults (29.7 ± 7.8 years, 55.4% female). The associations of gut microbiota and muscle had been shown in four observational studies. Probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, fermented milk, caloric restriction, and exercise in six studies displayed inconsistent effects on muscle mass, function, and gut microbiota.
CONCLUSIONS
Altering the gut microbiota through bacteria depletion, faecal transplantation, and various supplements was shown to directly affect muscle phenotypes. Probiotics, prebiotics, SCFAs, and bacterial products are potential novel therapies to enhance muscle mass and physical performance. Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium strains restored age-related muscle loss. Potential mechanisms of microbiome modulating muscle mainly include protein, energy, lipid, and glucose metabolism, inflammation level, neuromuscular junction, and mitochondrial function. The role of the gut microbiota in the development of muscle loss during aging is a crucial area that requires further studies for translation to patients.
Topics: Aged; Animals; Fecal Microbiota Transplantation; Female; Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Humans; Male; Mice; Prebiotics; Sarcopenia; Synbiotics
PubMed: 34523250
DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.12784 -
Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral Y Cirugia... May 2017Probiotics are microorganisms, mainly bacteria, which benefit the host's health. Many studies support the role of probiotics as a contributor to gastrointestinal health,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Probiotics are microorganisms, mainly bacteria, which benefit the host's health. Many studies support the role of probiotics as a contributor to gastrointestinal health, and nowadays many authors are trying to prove its influence in oral health maintenance.
OBJECTIVES
To review the published literature with the purpose of knowing the importance of using probiotics as a preventive and therapeutic method for oral infectious diseases management.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An electronic search in PubMed database with the keywords "oral health AND probiotics AND dentistry" was conducted. The inclusion criteria were: randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that assess the action of any probiotic strain in the treatment and / or prevention of an infectious oral disease, RCTs that assess the action of any probiotic strain on counting colony forming units (CFU) of oral pathogens, systematic reviews and meta-analysis. The Jadad scale was used to assess the high quality of RCTs.
RESULTS
Fifteen articles were considered for this review. Of which, 12 were RCTs of good / high quality (Jadad scale), two meta-analysis and one systematic review.
CONCLUSIONS
The literature reviewed suggests probiotics usage could be beneficial for the maintenance of oral health, due to its ability to decrease the colony forming units (CFU) counts of the oral pathogens. However, randomized clinical trials with long-term follow-up periods are needed to confirm their efficacy in reducing the prevalence/incidence of oral infectious diseases. Furthermore, the recognition of specific strains with probiotic activity for each infectious oral disease is required, in order to determine exact dose, treatment time and ideal vehicles.
Topics: Dental Caries; Humans; Mouth Diseases; Oral Health; Periodontal Diseases; Probiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28390121
DOI: 10.4317/medoral.21494 -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Jul 2019With growing interest in the gut microbiome, prebiotics and probiotics have received considerable attention as potential treatments for depression and anxiety. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
With growing interest in the gut microbiome, prebiotics and probiotics have received considerable attention as potential treatments for depression and anxiety. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis of 34 controlled clinical trials evaluating the effects of prebiotics and probiotics on depression and anxiety. Prebiotics did not differ from placebo for depression (d = -.08, p = .51) or anxiety (d = .12, p = .11). Probiotics yielded small but significant effects for depression (d = -.24, p < .01) and anxiety (d = -.10, p = .03). Sample type was a moderator for probiotics and depression, with a larger effect observed for clinical/medical samples (d = -.45, p < .001) than community ones. This effect increased to medium-to-large in a preliminary analysis restricted to psychiatric samples (d = -.73, p < .001). There is general support for antidepressant and anxiolytic effects of probiotics, but the pooled effects were reduced by the paucity of trials with clinical samples. Additional randomized clinical trials with psychiatric samples are necessary fully to evaluate their therapeutic potential.
Topics: Anxiety Disorders; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic; Depressive Disorder; Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Humans; Prebiotics; Probiotics
PubMed: 31004628
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.03.023 -
Nutrients May 2020Lactose intolerance (LI) is characterized by the presence of primarily gastrointestinal clinical signs resulting from colonic fermentation of lactose, the absorption of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Lactose intolerance (LI) is characterized by the presence of primarily gastrointestinal clinical signs resulting from colonic fermentation of lactose, the absorption of which is impaired due to a deficiency in the lactase enzyme. These clinical signs can be modified by several factors, including lactose dose, residual lactase expression, concurrent ingestion of other dietary components, gut-transit time, and enteric microbiome composition. In many of individuals with lactose malabsorption, clinical signs may be absent after consumption of normal amounts of milk or, in particular, dairy products (yogurt and cheese), which contain lactose partially digested by live bacteria. The intestinal microbiota can be modulated by biotic supplementation, which may alleviate the signs and symptoms of LI. This systematic review summarizes the available evidence on the influence of prebiotics and probiotics on lactase deficiency and LI. The literature search was conducted using the MEDLINE (via PUBMED) and SCOPUS databases following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and included randomized controlled trials. For each study selected, the risk of bias was assessed following the Cochrane Collaboration methodology. Our findings showed varying degrees of efficacy but an overall positive relationship between probiotics and LI in relation to specific strains and concentrations. Limitations regarding the wide heterogeneity between the studies included in this review should be taken into account. Only one study examined the benefits of prebiotic supplementation and LI. So further clinical trials are needed in order to gather more evidence.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Animals; Databases, Factual; Diarrhea; Diet; Flatulence; Food, Fortified; Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Humans; Lactase; Lactose; Lactose Intolerance; Milk; Prebiotics; Probiotics; Vomiting
PubMed: 32443748
DOI: 10.3390/nu12051487 -
International Journal of Molecular... Apr 2022An emerging body of literature demonstrates differences in the gut microbiome (GMB) of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) compared to healthy controls (HC),... (Review)
Review
An emerging body of literature demonstrates differences in the gut microbiome (GMB) of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) compared to healthy controls (HC), as well as the potential benefits of prebiotic, probiotic, and synbiotic treatment. We conducted a systematic review of 24 observational studies (n = 2817), and 19 interventional trials (n = 1119). We assessed alpha diversity, beta diversity, and taxa abundance changes in patients with MDD relative to HC, as well as the effect of prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics on depressive symptoms in individuals with clinical or subclinical depression. We observed no significant differences in alpha diversity but a significant difference in beta diversity between patients with MDD and HC. There were fluctuations in the abundance of specific taxa in patients with MDD relative to HC. Probiotic and synbiotic, but not prebiotic, treatment showed a modest benefit in reducing depressive symptoms in patients with MDD over four to nine weeks. The GMB profiles of patients with MDD differ significantly from HC, but further studies are needed to elucidate the benefits of prebiotic, probiotic and synbiotic treatments relative to antidepressants and over longer follow-up before these therapies are implemented into clinical practice.
Topics: Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Humans; Prebiotics; Probiotics; Synbiotics
PubMed: 35562885
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23094494 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2010Probiotics may offer a safe intervention in acute infectious diarrhoea to reduce the duration and severity of the illness. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Probiotics may offer a safe intervention in acute infectious diarrhoea to reduce the duration and severity of the illness.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of probiotics in proven or presumed acute infectious diarrhoea.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group's trials register (July 2010), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2010), MEDLINE (1966 to July 2010), EMBASE (1988 to July 2010), and reference lists from studies and reviews. We also contacted organizations and individuals working in the field, and pharmaceutical companies manufacturing probiotic agents.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing a specified probiotic agent with a placebo or no probiotic in people with acute diarrhoea that is proven or presumed to be caused by an infectious agent.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of the trial and extracted data. Primary outcomes were the mean duration of diarrhoea, stool frequency on day 2 after intervention and ongoing diarrhoea on day 4. A random-effects model was used.
MAIN RESULTS
Sixty-three studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 8014 participants. Of these, 56 trials recruited infants and young children. The trials varied in the definition used for acute diarrhoea and the end of the diarrhoeal illness, as well as in the risk of bias. The trials were undertaken in a wide range of different settings and also varied greatly in organisms tested, dosage, and participants' characteristics. No adverse events were attributed to the probiotic intervention.Probiotics reduced the duration of diarrhoea, although the size of the effect varied considerably between studies.The average of the effect was significant for mean duration of diarrhoea (mean difference 24.76 hours; 95% confidence interval 15.9 to 33.6 hours; n=4555, trials=35) diarrhoea lasting ≥4 days (risk ratio 0.41; 0.32 to 0.53; n=2853, trials=29) and stool frequency on day 2 (mean difference 0.80; 0.45 to 1.14; n=2751, trials=20).The differences in effect size between studies was not explained by study quality, probiotic strain, the number of different strains, the viability of the organisms, dosage of organisms, the causes of diarrhoea, or the severity of the diarrhoea, or whether the studies were done in developed or developing countries.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Used alongside rehydration therapy, probiotics appear to be safe and have clear beneficial effects in shortening the duration and reducing stool frequency in acute infectious diarrhoea. However, more research is needed to guide the use of particular probiotic regimens in specific patient groups.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Child; Child, Preschool; Diarrhea; Humans; Infant; Probiotics
PubMed: 21069673
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003048.pub3 -
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection... 2022Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common gastrointestinal condition. Studies regarding the treatment of IBS with probiotics have not yielded consistent results, and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common gastrointestinal condition. Studies regarding the treatment of IBS with probiotics have not yielded consistent results, and the best probiotics has not yet been confirmed. Therefore, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to assess the relative rank order of different probiotics for IBS.
METHOD
We searched for RCTs on the efficacy of probiotics for IBS until August 25, 2021. The primary outcome was the symptom relief rate, as well as global symptoms, abdominal pain, bloating, and straining scores. The NMA was conducted using Stata 15.0. We also used meta-regression to explore whether the treatment length and dose influenced the efficacy.
RESULTS
Forty-three RCTs, with 5,531 IBS patients, were included in this analysis. Firstly, we compared the efficacy of different probiotic species. exhibited the highest probability to be the optimal probiotic specie in improving IBS symptom relief rate, as well as global symptom, abdominal pain, bloating, and straining scores. In regard to the secondary outcomes, ranked first in ameliorating the QOL of IBS patients, but without any significant differences compared with other probiotic species in standardized mean differences (SMD) estimates. Moreover, patients received had lowest incidence of adverse events. The meta-regression revealed that no significant differences were found between participants using different doses of probiotics in all outcomes, while the treatment length, as a confounder, can significantly influence the efficacy of probiotics in ameliorating abdominal pain (Coef = -2.30; p = 0.035) and straining (Coef = -3.15; p = 0.020) in IBS patients. Thus, we performed the subgroup analysis on treatment length subsequently in these two outcomes, which showed that efficacy of using 8 weeks ranked first both in improving the abdominal pain and straining scores. Additionally, still had significant efficacy compared to different types of probiotic combinations in present study.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings of this NMA suggested that had prominent efficacy in treating IBS patients, and incorporating into a probiotic combination, or genetically engineering it to amplify its biological function may be a future research target to treat IBS patients. With few direct comparisons available between individual therapies today, this NMA may have utility in forming treatment guideline for IBS with probiotics.
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Humans; Irritable Bowel Syndrome; Network Meta-Analysis; Probiotics; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35433498
DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2022.859967 -
Journal of the International Society of... 2016Fatigue, mood disturbances, under performance and gastrointestinal distress are common among athletes during training and competition. The psychosocial and physical... (Review)
Review
Fatigue, mood disturbances, under performance and gastrointestinal distress are common among athletes during training and competition. The psychosocial and physical demands during intense exercise can initiate a stress response activating the sympathetic-adrenomedullary and hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axes, resulting in the release of stress and catabolic hormones, inflammatory cytokines and microbial molecules. The gut is home to trillions of microorganisms that have fundamental roles in many aspects of human biology, including metabolism, endocrine, neuronal and immune function. The gut microbiome and its influence on host behavior, intestinal barrier and immune function are believed to be a critical aspect of the brain-gut axis. Recent evidence in murine models shows that there is a high correlation between physical and emotional stress during exercise and changes in gastrointestinal microbiota composition. For instance, induced exercise-stress decreased cecal levels of spp and increased which have well defined roles in intestinal mucus degradation and immune function. Diet is known to dramatically modulate the composition of the gut microbiota. Due to the considerable complexity of stress responses in elite athletes (from leaky gut to increased catabolism and depression), defining standard diet regimes is difficult. However, some preliminary experimental data obtained from studies using probiotics and prebiotics studies show some interesting results, indicating that the microbiota acts like an endocrine organ (e.g. secreting serotonin, dopamine or other neurotransmitters) and may control the HPA axis in athletes. What is troubling is that dietary recommendations for elite athletes are primarily based on a low consumption of plant polysaccharides, which is associated with reduced microbiota diversity and functionality (e.g. less synthesis of byproducts such as short chain fatty acids and neurotransmitters). As more elite athletes suffer from psychological and gastrointestinal conditions that can be linked to the gut, targeting the microbiota therapeutically may need to be incorporated in athletes' diets that take into consideration dietary fiber as well as microbial taxa not currently present in athlete's gut.
Topics: Athletes; Athletic Performance; Brain; Diet; Food; Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Gastrointestinal Tract; Hormones; Humans; Probiotics; Sports Nutritional Physiological Phenomena; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 27924137
DOI: 10.1186/s12970-016-0155-6 -
BMJ Open Aug 2021To evaluate existing evidence for the use of probiotics in preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD) in adults. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate existing evidence for the use of probiotics in preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD) in adults.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
DATA SOURCES
We performed a literature search of the electronic databases CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, MEDLINE (Ovid) and Web of Science from database inception to May 2021 as well as hand searching of trial registries and reference lists of related reviews.
STUDY SELECTION
Two reviewers identified whether RCTs met the following inclusion criteria: adult population to whom antibiotics were administered; a probiotic intervention; a placebo, alternative dose, alternative probiotic strain or no treatment control; and incidence of AAD as the outcome.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two reviewers independently collected data and assessed risk of bias using preconstructed data extraction forms. We used a random effects model for all analyses. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate species-specific and dose-specific response.
RESULTS
Forty-two studies (11,305 participants) were included in this review. The pooled analysis suggests that co-administration of probiotics with antibiotics reduces the risk of AAD in adults by 37% (risk ratio (RR)=0.63 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.73), p<0.00001). The overall quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria was found to be moderate. In subgroup analyses, high dose compared with low dose of the same probiotic demonstrated a positive protective effect (RR 0.54 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.76), p<0.01), and only certain species, mainly of the lactobacillus and bifidobacteria genera, were found to be effective. Studies with a low baseline AAD risk did not show any difference in risk but studies with moderate or high baseline AAD risk demonstrated a significant risk reduction.
CONCLUSIONS
Probiotics are effective for preventing AAD. Secondary analyses of higher dosages and certain species have shown increased effectiveness. Our results may not be applicable in clinical scenarios of lower baseline AAD risk.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Diarrhea; Humans; Incidence; Lactobacillus; Probiotics
PubMed: 34385227
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043054 -
Nutrients Jan 2020Probiotic is little known for its benefits on upper gastrointestinal health. The objective of this systematic review was to examine the efficacy of probiotics in...
Probiotic is little known for its benefits on upper gastrointestinal health. The objective of this systematic review was to examine the efficacy of probiotics in alleviating the frequency and severity of symptoms in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in the general adult population. The PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for prospective studies on GERD, heartburn, regurgitation, and dyspepsia, without any limitation on sample size. The Jadad scale was used to evaluate the quality of randomized controlled trials. In total, 13 prospective studies that were published in 12 articles were included in the analysis and scored per the Jadad scale as high- (five studies), medium- (two), and low- (six) quality. One article reported on two probiotic groups; thus, 14 comparisons were included in the selected studies, of which 11 (79%) reported positive benefits of probiotics on symptoms of GERD. Five out of 11 positive outcomes (45%) noted benefits on reflux symptoms: three noted reduced regurgitation; improvements in reflux or heartburn were seen in one study; five (45%) saw improvements in dyspepsia symptoms; and nine (81%) saw improvements in other upper gastrointestinal symptoms, such as nausea (three studies), abdominal pain (five), and gas-related symptoms (four), such as belching, gurgling, and burping. In conclusion, probiotic use can be beneficial for GERD symptoms, such as regurgitation and heartburn. However, proper placebo-controlled, randomized, and double-blinded clinical trials with a sufficient number of participants are warranted to confirm its efficacy in alleviating these symptoms. Further, interventions with longer durations and an intermediate analysis of endpoints should be considered to determine the proper therapeutic window.
Topics: Gastroesophageal Reflux; Humans; Probiotics
PubMed: 31906573
DOI: 10.3390/nu12010132