-
1.
Effect of probiotics or prebiotics on thyroid function: A meta-analysis of eight randomized controlled trials.
Shu, Q, Kang, C, Li, J, Hou, Z, Xiong, M, Wang, X, Peng, H
PloS one. 2024;19(1):e0296733
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The gut microbiome is thought to play a role in thyroid disorders, mediated by regulating iodine uptake, degradation and enterohepatic cycling of thyroid hormones, and differences in microbiome composition between patients with thyroid disorders and healthy individuals have been observed. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of pro-, pre- and synbiotics on thyroid function (thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH), free thyroxine (fT4) and free triiodothyronine (fT3) and thyroid stimulating hormone receptor antibody (TRAb)) in patients with and without thyroid disorders. 8 randomised controlled trials including 367 participants were included in the review and meta-analysis. Neither pro-, pre- nor synbiotics had a significant effect on TSH, fT4 or fT3 but pre- and probiotics lead to a significant reduction in TRAb in patients with Graves’ disease.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Microbiome-directed therapies are increasingly utilized to optimize thyroid function in both healthy individuals and those with thyroid disorders. However, recent doubts have been raised regarding the efficacy of probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics in improving thyroid function. This systematic review aimed to investigate the potential relationship between probiotics/prebiotics and thyroid function by analyzing the impact on thyroid hormone levels. METHODS We conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that investigated the effects of probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics on free triiodothyronine (fT3), free thyroxine (fT4), thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH), and thyroid stimulating hormone receptor antibody (TRAb) levels. We searched for articles from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase up until April 1st, 2023, without any language restriction. Quantitative data analysis was performed using a random-effects model, with standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval as summary statistics. The methods and results were reported according to the PRISMA2020 statement. RESULTS A total of eight articles were included in this review. The meta-analysis showed no significant alterations in TSH (SMD: -0.01, 95% CI: -0.21, 0.20, P = 0.93; I2: 0.00%), fT4 (SMD: 0.04, 95% CI: -0.29, 0.21, P = 0.73; I2: 0.00%) or fT3 (SMD: 0.45, 95% CI: -0.14, 1.03, P = 0.43; I2: 78.00%), while a significant reduction in TRAb levels was observed (SMD: -0.85, 95% CI: -1.54, -0.15, P = 0.02; I2: 18.00%) following probiotics/prebiotics supplementation. No indication of publication bias was found. CONCLUSIONS Probiotics/prebiotics supplementation does not influence thyroid hormone levels, but may modestly reduce TRAb levels in patients with Graves' disease.
-
2.
Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Jamshidi, P, Farsi, Y, Nariman, Z, Hatamnejad, MR, Mohammadzadeh, B, Akbarialiabad, H, Nasiri, MJ, Sechi, LA
International journal of molecular sciences. 2023;24(19)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorder the cause of which is not yet fully elucidated. Probiotics, prebiotics and dietary changes have been shown to mitigate IBS symptoms whilst the results from studies of faecal microbiota transplants (FMT) have been inconsistent. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blind, randomised controlled trials (RCT) was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FMT in IBS. 7 RCTs with a low risk of bias and no publication bias were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, no statistically significant effect was observed. A subgroup analysis by treatment modality showed that benefits were seen with lower GI administration of a single dose of multiple-donor FMT. Abdominal pain, nausea, diarrhoea and bloating were the most common adverse events, with no severe or critical adverse events reported. The authors call for larger and longer clinical trials to fill existing knowledge gaps.
Abstract
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) poses a significant challenge due to its poorly understood pathogenesis, substantial morbidity, and often inadequate treatment outcomes. The role of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) in managing IBS symptoms remains inconclusive. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to ascertain the effectiveness of FMT in relieving symptoms in IBS patients. A thorough search was executed on PubMed/Medline and Embase databases until 14 June 2023, including all studies on FMT use in IBS patients. We examined the efficiency of FMT in reducing patients' symptoms overall and in particular subgroups, classified by placebo preparation, FMT preparation, frequency, and route of administration. Among 1015 identified studies, seven met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. The overall symptomatology of FMT-treated IBS patients did not significantly differ from the control group (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.99, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.39-2.5). Multiple doses of FMT compared with non-FMT placebo, or single-donor FMT therapy compared with autologous FMT placebo also showed no significant benefit (OR = 0.32, 95%CI (0.07-1.32), p = 0.11, and OR = 1.67, 95%CI (0.59-4.67), p = 0.32, respectively). However, a single dose of multiple-donor FMT administered via colonoscopy (lower gastrointestinal (GI) administration) significantly improved patient symptoms compared with autologous FMT placebo (OR = 2.54, 95%CI (1.20-5.37), p = 0.01, and OR = 2.2, 95%CI (1.20-4.03), p = 0.01, respectively). The studies included in the analysis showed a low risk of bias and no publication bias. In conclusion, lower GI administration of a single dose of multiple-donor FMT significantly alleviates patient complaints compared with the autologous FMT used as a placebo. The underlying mechanisms need to be better understood, and further experimental studies are desired to fill the current gaps.
-
3.
Irritable Bowel Syndrome Is Not Associated with an Increased Risk of Polyps and Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Vichos, T, Rezaie, A, Vichos, P, Cash, B, Pimentel, M
Digestive diseases and sciences. 2023;68(6):2585-2596
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers and adenomatous colorectal polyps (CRP) are a risk factor for developing CRC. The potential role of functional disturbances seen in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) for the development of CRC are not yet clear. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the occurrence of CRC and CRP in IBS patients. 14 cohort studies with a total of 654,764 IBS patients and 2,277,195 controls and six cross-sectional studies with 26,641 IBS patients and 87,803 controls were included in the review. Based on the pooled data from 5 cross-sectional studies, IBS patients had a significantly lower occurrence of CRP (by 71%). CRC risk was also reduced but this did not reach statistical significance. Only four of the 14 cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis and, again, CRC risk was lower in IBS patients but this was not statistically significant.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy in the US. Several factors are associated with increased/decreased CRC risk and often linked to adenomatous colorectal polyps (CRP). Recent studies suggest a lower risk of neoplastic lesions among irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients. We aimed to systematically assess the occurrence of CRC and CRP in IBS patients. METHODS Searches of the Medline, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases were performed, blindly and independently, by two investigators. Studies of CRC or CRP incidence in IBS patients (diagnosed by Rome or other symptom-based criteria) were eligible for inclusion. CRC and CRP effect estimates were pooled in meta-analyses using random models. RESULTS Of 4941 non-duplicate studies, 14 were included, comprising 654,764 IBS patients and 2,277,195 controls in 8 cohort studies, and 26,641 IBS patients and 87,803 controls in 6 cross-sectional studies. Pooled analysis revealed a significantly decreased prevalence of CRP in IBS subjects vs. controls, with a pooled odds ratio (OR) of 0.29 (95% CI (0.15, 0.54)). There was significant heterogeneity between studies (I2 = 96%, p < 0.01). This finding persisted when studies which did not report pre-cancerous polyps separately were excluded (OR 0.23, 95% CI (0.15, 0.35), I2 = 85%, p < 0.01). CRC prevalence was lower in IBS subjects, but this did not reach statistical significance (OR 0.40, 95% CI (0.09, 1.77]). CONCLUSION Our analyses reveal a decreased incidence of colorectal polyps in IBS, although CRC did not reach significance. Mechanistic studies with detailed genotypic analysis and clinical phenotyping are needed to better elucidate the potentially protective effect of IBS on CRC development.
-
4.
Effect of supplementation with probiotics or synbiotics on cardiovascular risk factors in patients with metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Chen, T, Wang, J, Liu, Z, Gao, F
Frontiers in endocrinology. 2023;14:1282699
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Metabolic syndrome (metS) is characterised by insulin resistance, dyslipidaemia, central obesity and/or high blood pressure and is a significant risk factor for cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus. MetS is associated with an imbalanced microbiome and some but not all studies have shown benefits of supplementation with probiotics. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was to evaluate the effects of pro- or synbiotics on cardiovascular risk factors (body mass index, LDL cholesterol, fasting blood glucose and systolic blood pressure) in patients with metS. 11 studies were included in the review of which 7 were judged to have a low risk of bias, whilst risk of bias was unclear in 4 articles. The meta-analysis found that pro- or synbiotics have a positive effect on body mass index, LDL cholesterol and fasting blood glucose but not on systolic blood pressure. Subgroup analysis of pro- and synbiotics separately also found no effects on systolic blood pressure.
Abstract
PURPOSE The effectiveness of probiotics or synbiotics in adults with metabolic syndromes (MetS) remains controversial, this meta-analysis will further analyze the effects of probiotics or synbiotics on cardiovascular factors in adults with MetS. METHODS We searched Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and other databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effects of probiotics or synbiotics on MetS in adults up to July 2023, and used RevMan 5.4.0 software for statistical analysis. RESULTS This analysis included eleven RCTs (n = 608 participants), and the results showed that compared with the control group, supplementation with probiotics or synbiotics reduced body mass index (weighted mean difference, WMD = -0.83, 95% CI = [-1.21, -0.44], P <0.0001, n = 9), low-density lipoprotein (LDL-c) (standard mean difference, SMD = -0.24, 95% CI = [-0.41, -0.08], P = 0.004, n = 10), fasting blood glucose (FBG)(SMD = -0.17, 95% CI = [-0.33, -0.01], P = 0.03, n = 11), but had no beneficial effect on systolic blood pressure (SBP) (WMD = 1.24, 95% CI = [-2.06, 4.54], P = 0.46, n = 8) in MetS patients. CONCLUSION Supplementation with probiotics or synbiotics can reduce BMI, LDL-c, FBG in patients with MetS, but our findings did not demonstrate a favorable effect on reducing SBP. Future studies with larger samples and longer intervention periods are needed.
-
5.
Effects of prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics on serum creatinine in non-dialysis patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Liu, F, Liu, Y, Lv, X, Lun, H
Renal failure. 2023;45(1):2152693
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Creatinine is a biomarker of kidney function and is used to diagnose chronic kidney disease. The aim of this meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was to evaluate the effect of supplementation with prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics on serum creatinine levels in patients not receiving dialysis. 12 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis of which seven were judged to have a low risk of bias whilst 1 was judged to have a high risk of bias. Overall, there was no significant effect of supplementation on serum creatinine levels. The following three subgroup analyses also showed no significant effects on creatinine levels: 1) by probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics separately; 2) by duration: two months or less or longer than two months, 3) subgroup of 7 studies which included patients with non-dialysis kidney disease. The authors concluded that probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics do not decrease serum creatinine levels.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Serum creatinine level are influenced by many factors. Although accumulated data suggested that prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics supplements could affect serum creatinine level, the results remained controversial. The aim of the present paper was to evaluate the effects of prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics on serum creatinine in non-dialysis patients. METHODS PubMed, EMBASE (Excerpta Medica Database) and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for eligible randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) which were limited to English language studies until 30 September 2022. A random-effects model was performed to analyze the impact of pooled trials. RESULT Twelve randomized, controlled trial studies were included in the meta-analysis. Prebiotics, probiotics or synbiotics supplementation did not significantly decrease the serum creatinine levels in non-dialysis patients compared to placebo [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.05; 95% confidence interval (CI): (-0.21, 0.31); p = 0.72; I2 = 61%]. CONCLUSION The present meta-analysis indicated that supplementation with prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics could not act as promising adjuvant therapies to decrease the serum creatinine levels in non-dialysis patients.
-
6.
A meta-analysis of the effects of probiotics on acute pancreatitis.
Hou, X, Yang, J, Zhao, Z, Liu, L
Asian journal of surgery. 2023;46(9):3885-3889
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Acute pancreatitis is an inflammation and dysfunction of the pancreas due to abnormally activated pancreatic enzymes. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of probiotics on acute pancreatitis. 16 randomised controlled trials including 1,305 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Probiotics led to reductions in the length of hospital stay, the duration of time in the intensive care unit, sepsis and overall infection rate. There were no significant effects on mortality, pancreatic complications, surgery, drainage rate and systemic complications.
-
7.
Short- and potential long-term adverse health outcomes of COVID-19: a rapid review.
Leung, TYM, Chan, AYL, Chan, EW, Chan, VKY, Chui, CSL, Cowling, BJ, Gao, L, Ge, MQ, Hung, IFN, Ip, MSM, et al
Emerging microbes & infections. 2020;9(1):2190-2199
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The Coronavirus pandemic (Covid-19) has infected millions of people worldwide and there is evidence that it affects many systems in the human body. This rapid review summarises the current evidence on short-term negative health outcomes of Covid-19. It also assesses the risk of potential long-term negative effects by looking at data from the other coronaviruses; Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). The burden for caring for Covid-19 survivors is likely to be huge and so policy makers need suitable data to put the appropriate care strategies in place. The review is divided into sections as per body system affected: Immune, respiratory, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, hepatic and renal, neurological, dermatological, mental health, pregnancy and prenatal exposure. The evidence (short-term and long-term) is then reviewed by experts in those fields. Further large-scale studies are needed to monitor the adverse effects and to measure the long-term health consequences.
Abstract
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in millions of patients infected worldwide and indirectly affecting even more individuals through disruption of daily living. Long-term adverse outcomes have been reported with similar diseases from other coronaviruses, namely Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). Emerging evidence suggests that COVID-19 adversely affects different systems in the human body. This review summarizes the current evidence on the short-term adverse health outcomes and assesses the risk of potential long-term adverse outcomes of COVID-19. Major adverse outcomes were found to affect different body systems: immune system (including but not limited to Guillain-Barré syndrome and paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome), respiratory system (lung fibrosis and pulmonary thromboembolism), cardiovascular system (cardiomyopathy and coagulopathy), neurological system (sensory dysfunction and stroke), as well as cutaneous and gastrointestinal manifestations, impaired hepatic and renal function. Mental health in patients with COVID-19 was also found to be adversely affected. The burden of caring for COVID-19 survivors is likely to be huge. Therefore, it is important for policy makers to develop comprehensive strategies in providing resources and capacity in the healthcare system. Future epidemiological studies are needed to further investigate the long-term impact on COVID-19 survivors.
-
8.
Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis: Lactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938 for Treating Acute Gastroenteritis in Children. An Update.
Patro-Gołąb, B, Szajewska, H
Nutrients. 2019;11(11)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Acute gastroenteritis (AGE) is a common health problem in children and, globally, diarrhoea is one of the leading causes of death in children younger than the age of 5 years. Probiotics have been extensively studied as a supportive treatment regimen in children with AGE and shown to be effective in reducing both diarrhoea duration and severity, and potentially reducing the duration of hospitalization. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis of four randomised controlled trials including 347 children was to provide an update on the research into a particular strain of Lactobacillus reuteri for the treatment of AGE. The meta-analysis showed a significantly reduced duration of illness and hospitalisation, as well as increased cure rate on day 1 and 2, but not 3, 4 or 5. Based on two of the four trials there was no difference in number of watery stools on day 1, 2, 3 or 4. The authors note that the clinical relevance of the findings was limited due to the small effect size and methodological limitations of the included studies.
Abstract
The effectiveness of Lactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938 (L. reuteri) for the management of acute gastroenteritis (AGE) has been recently questioned. We performed a systematic review to update evidence on L. reuteri for treating AGE in children. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library databases, and additional data sources from January 2016 (end of search for our 2016 systematic review) to August 2019. The primary outcomes were stool volume and duration of diarrhea. Four RCTs were included. None of them evaluated stool volume. Compared with placebo or no treatment, L. reuteri reduced diarrhea duration (four RCTs, n = 347, mean difference, MD -0.87 days, 95% CI [-1.43, -0.31]). L. reuteri use was also associated with a reduced duration of hospitalization (three RCTs, n = 284, MD -0.54 days, 95% CI [-1.09, 0.0]). The small effect sizes of limited clinical relevance and methodological limitations of the included trials should be noted when interpreting these findings.
-
9.
The Efficacy of Probiotics, Prebiotic Inulin-Type Fructans, and Synbiotics in Human Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Astó, E, Méndez, I, Audivert, S, Farran-Codina, A, Espadaler, J
Nutrients. 2019;11(2)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
It is thought that ulcerative colitis (UC) may be caused by an excessive immune response to endogenous bacteria in genetically predisposed individuals, and therefore that manipulating of the gut flora may be of benefit. Microbial diversity and intestinal microbiota stability are lower in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (including UC), than in healthy people. This systematic review and metanalysis looked at clinical trials using probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics (a combination of pro- and prebiotics) in UC. 18 papers were included, with a total of 1491 adult and 69 children. 16 of these were on probiotics, one on prebiotics and one on synbiotics. Outcomes considered in this systematic review were the effects on short chain fatty acids (SCFAs, metabolic end products of gut bacteria which have a beneficial effect on immune and gut health), inflammation levels, composition of faecal microbiota and UC remission. In trials on inactive UC patients, the faecal concentration of SCFAs did not differ significantly between the probiotic and placebo groups, whilst in trials with active UC patients, SCFAs significantly increased after probiotic supplementation. All studies reported a significant reduction in inflammation. Meta-analysis of studies which looked at induction/maintenance of remission by probiotics showed that this depends on a) the type of disease activity score used to assess remission, and b) the type of probiotics used, with bifidobacteria containing probiotics, VSL3 and Mutaflor showing benefits, but studies without bifidobacteria being no different from placebo. The authors conclude that bifidobacteria containing probiotics seem to be beneficial in terms of reaching remission in patients with UC, although there is insufficient information on necessary dose and duration of treatment. They note that there are only few studies on prebiotics and synbiotics and are calling for a standardisation of scales to assess remission.
Abstract
Studies of probiotics, fructan-type prebiotics, and synbiotics in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) show significant heterogeneity in methodology and results. Here, we study the efficacy of such interventions and the reasons for the heterogeneity of their results. Eligible random controlled trials were collected from the PUBMED and SCOPUS databases. A total of 18 placebo-controlled and active treatment-controlled (i.e., mesalazine) studies were selected with a Jadad score ≥ 3, including 1491 patients with UC. Data for prebiotics and synbiotics were sparse and consequently these studies were excluded from the meta-analysis. The UC remission efficacy of probiotics was measured in terms of relative risk (RR) and odds ratio (OR). Significant effects were observed in patients with active UC whenever probiotics containing bifidobacteria were used, or when adopting the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-recommended scales (UC Disease Activity Index and Disease Activity Index). By the FDA recommended scales, the RR was 1.55 (CI95%: 1.13⁻2.15, p-value = 0.007, I² = 29%); for bifidobacteria-containing probiotics, the RR was 1.73 (CI95%: 1.23⁻2.43, p-value = 0.002, I² = 35%). No significant effects were observed on the maintenance of remission for placebo-controlled or mesalazine-controlled studies. We conclude that a validated scale is necessary to determine the state of patients with UC. However, probiotics containing bifidobacteria are promising for the treatment of active UC.
-
10.
The anxiolytic effect of probiotics: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical and preclinical literature.
Reis, DJ, Ilardi, SS, Punt, SEW
PloS one. 2018;13(6):e0199041
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The microbiome-gut-brain axis in general and the possibility of altering the microbiome through administration of probiotics to support physical and mental health has received much attention in recent years. Here, a systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out to evaluate the clinical and preclinical evidence for the use of probiotics in anxiety. 22 preclinical (rodent) studies were included in the meta-analysis and showed an overall significant anxiolytic effect of probiotics in diseased, but not healthy, animals. Studies were heterogenous with regards to species and strains of probiotic used. Subgroup analysis showed that only Lactobacillus rhamnosus significantly reduced anxiety-like behaviour. 14 human studies were included in the meta-analysis and overall no anxiolytic effect was observed. Only three out of the 14 studies showed a positive effect (vs 12 out of the 22 animal studies), one of which used L. rhamnosus. Due to the small number of trials no subgroup analysis could be performed. Apart from the small number and heterogeneity of human studies, the authors discuss further possible reasons for the discrepancy between animal and human studies: • Dose: Dosages were typically 100 times higher (per kg) in animals than in humans. • Diseased vs healthy subjects: In animal studies, only those which investigated animals displaying anxiety related behaviour improved with probiotic administration. None of the human studies specifically recruited anxious individuals, eight of the studies included healthy subjects, the other six selected participants for other disorders, including four for irritable bowel syndrome. The authors conclude that more research into an anxiolytic effect of probiotics in humans is warranted, especially using L. rhamnosus, studying patients with anxiety, and using higher dosages and longer study duration.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- While preclinical animal studies suggest that probiotics may help reduce anxiety, such findings have not yet translated to clinical research in humans.
- Further investigation of probiotic treatment for clinically relevant anxiety is warranted, particularly with respect to the probiotic species L. rhamnosus.
Evidence Category:
-
X
A: Meta-analyses, position-stands, randomized-controlled trials (RCTs)
-
B: Systematic reviews including RCTs of limited number
-
C: Non-randomized trials, observational studies, narrative reviews
-
D: Case-reports, evidence-based clinical findings
-
E: Opinion piece, other
Summary Review:
This review highlights how important it is for future studies to focus on clinically anxious patients and also to consider exploring the effects of differing doses of probiotics in this population.
Clinical practice applications:
Anxiety disorders affect as many as 3 in 10 people at some point during their lifetime. On that basis, it would be great to have a viable non-pharmaceutical option to help with some of the symptoms.
Considerations for future research:
If the results from the pre-clinical studies can be corroborated in human populations, this could have widespread clinical implications.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Probiotics have generated intensive research interest in recent years as a novel mode of treatment for physical and mental illness. Nevertheless, the anxiolytic potential of probiotics remains unclear. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical and preclinical (animal model) evidence regarding the effect of probiotic administration on anxiety. METHODS The PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases were reviewed for preclinical and clinical studies that met the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The effects of probiotics on anxiety-like behavior and symptoms of anxiety were analyzed by meta-analyses. Separate subgroup analyses were conducted on diseased versus healthy animals, specific preclinical probiotic species, and clinical versus healthy human samples. RESULTS Data were extracted from 22 preclinical studies (743 animals) and 14 clinical studies (1527 individuals). Overall, probiotics reduced anxiety-like behavior in animals (Hedges' g = -0.47, 95% CI -0.77 --0.16, p = 0.004). Subgroup analyses revealed a significant reduction only among diseased animals. Probiotic species-level analyses identified only Lactobacillus (L.) rhamnosus as an anxiolytic species, but these analyses were broadly under-powered. Probiotics did not significantly reduce symptoms of anxiety in humans (Hedges' g = -0.12, 95% CI -0.29-0.05, p = 0.151), and did not differentially affect clinical and healthy human samples. CONCLUSIONS While preclinical (animal) studies suggest that probiotics may help reduce anxiety, such findings have not yet translated to clinical research in humans, perhaps due to the dearth of extant research with clinically anxious populations. Further investigation of probiotic treatment for clinically relevant anxiety is warranted, particularly with respect to the probiotic species L. rhamnosus.