0
selected
-
1.
Effect of prebiotics, probiotics, synbiotics on depression: results from a meta-analysis.
Zhang, Q, Chen, B, Zhang, J, Dong, J, Ma, J, Zhang, Y, Jin, K, Lu, J
BMC psychiatry. 2023;23(1):477
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a mood disorder that impairs psychosocial function and quality of life. Recent studies show that prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics reveal a novel way to treat psychiatric disorders such as depression through the microbiota-gut-brain axis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of prebiotics, probiotics and synbiotics in alleviating depressive symptoms. This study was a meta-analysis of thirteen studies with a total of 786 participants who were allocated to the intervention group (n=427) and the placebo group (n=359). Results showed that the overall effects of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics on depressive symptoms were significantly superior to those of placebo. Additionally, biological sex was a vital factor that influenced patients’ responses to the treatment. Authors concluded that agents that manipulate gut microbiota might become a novel approach to treat patients with mild-to-moderate depression.
Abstract
Accumulating studies have shown the effects of gut microbiota management tools in improving depression. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics on patients with depression. We searched six databases up to July 2022. In total, 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 786 participants were included. The overall results demonstrated that patients who received prebiotics, probiotics or synbiotics had significantly improved symptoms of depression compared with those in the placebo group. However, subgroup analysis only confirmed the significant antidepressant effects of agents that contained probiotics. In addition, patients with mild or moderate depression could both benefit from the treatment. Studies with a lower proportion of females reported stronger effects for alleviating depressive symptoms. In conclusion, agents that manipulate gut microbiota might improve mild-to-moderate depression. It is necessary to further investigate the benefits of prebiotic, probiotic and synbiotic treatments relative to antidepressants and follow up with individuals over a longer time before these therapies are implemented in clinical practice.
-
2.
Probiotics and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in children and adolescents: a systematic review.
Avelar-Rodríguez, D, Peña-Vélez, R, Popov, J, Hill, L, Ryan, PM
Revista espanola de enfermedades digestivas. 2023;115(8):418-427
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), as a direct result of the escalating childhood obesity epidemic, is a significant public health issue globally. NAFLD is the most common cause of chronic liver disease in the paediatric population. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of evidence currently available for the use of microbial therapies (i.e., prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics) in the treatment of NAFLD in children with obesity. This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis of five randomised controlled studies. Results showed that although there is a range of promising effects on both clinical and biochemical parameters, significant interstudy discrepancies reduce reliability and generalisability of these results. Authors concluded there is insufficient evidence to support the beneficial role of probiotics and synbiotics in the treatment of pediatric NAFLD given the substantial degree of discordance amongst the available trials.
Abstract
BACKGROUND non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in childhood is an increasing global public health issue with significant long-term consequences. NAFLD management mainly consists of lifestyle modifications, however, adjunct pharmacological therapies are currently lacking. Gut microbiota manipulation via probiotics may alter the course of pediatric NAFLD. The objective of this systematic review was to synthesize all the available literature on the use of probiotics in children and adolescents with NAFLD. METHODS PubMed, EBSCOhost, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for trials on the use of probiotics in pediatric NAFLD. A quantitative DerSimonian Laird random effects meta-analysis was performed when possible; otherwise, a narrative summary of the study outcomes was presented and discussed. A separate search was completed to include all the ongoing registered trials on probiotics use in pediatric NAFLD. RESULTS five randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. Of these, four trials were included in the final quantitative analysis. Probiotic therapy significantly reduced the levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (mean difference: -10.39 [-19.85, -0.93]), however significant heterogeneity between studies was identified (I2, 93 %). CONCLUSIONS there is insufficient evidence to support probiotics in the treatment of pediatric NAFLD given the substantial degree of discordance amongst the available trials. Lifestyle modifications focusing on maintaining a normal BMI and regular exercise continue to be the gold standard approach to treating NAFLD in children.
-
3.
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.
-
4.
Pregnancy outcomes in women taking probiotics or prebiotics: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Jarde, A, Lewis-Mikhael, AM, Moayyedi, P, Stearns, JC, Collins, SM, Beyene, J, McDonald, SD
BMC pregnancy and childbirth. 2018;18(1):14
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
It has been suggested that probiotics might help prevent premature birth, but two previous systematic reviews found possible increases in risk. The objective of this meta-analysis was to perform an up-to-date review of the risk of premature birth and other pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women taking probiotics or prebiotics. The authors pooled data from 27 studies, one using prebiotics and the rest probiotics. Taking probiotics or prebiotics during pregnancy did not change the risk of premature birth, or other pregnancy outcomes. The authors concluded that more studies are required to assess the safety and effects of taking probiotics and prebiotics during pregnancy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Probiotics are living microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit. It has been speculated that probiotics might help prevent preterm birth, but in two previous systematic reviews possible major increases in this risk have been suggested. Our objective was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the risk of preterm birth and other adverse pregnancy outcomes in pregnant women taking probiotics, prebiotics or synbiotics. METHODS We searched six electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science's Core collection and BIOSIS Preview) up to September 2016 and contacted authors for additional data. We included randomized controlled trials in which women with a singleton pregnancy received a probiotic, prebiotic or synbiotic intervention. Two independent reviewers extracted data using a piloted form and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We used random-effects meta-analyses to pool the results. RESULTS We identified 2574 publications, screened 1449 non-duplicate titles and abstracts and read 160 full text articles. The 49 publications that met our inclusion criteria represented 27 studies. No study used synbiotics, one used prebiotics and the rest used probiotics. Being randomized to take probiotics during pregnancy neither increased nor decreased the risk of preterm birth < 34 weeks (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.29-3.64, I2 0%, 1017 women in 5 studies), preterm birth < 37 weeks (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.71-1.63, I2 0%, 2484 women in 11 studies), or most of our secondary outcomes, including gestational diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSIONS We found no evidence that taking probiotics or prebiotics during pregnancy either increases or decreases the risk of preterm birth or other infant and maternal adverse pregnancy outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION We prospectively published the protocol for this study in the PROSPERO database ( CRD42016048129 ).
-
5.
The influence of prebiotic or probiotic supplementation on antibody titers after influenza vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Yeh, TL, Shih, PC, Liu, SJ, Lin, CH, Liu, JM, Lei, WT, Lin, CY
Drug design, development and therapy. 2018;12:217-230
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Influenza vaccination is widely used although concerns regarding its efficacy exist. Both prebiotics and probiotics have been shown to produce protective effects against influenza infection and may enhance the immune response to the vaccination, especially in the elderly. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the effect of pre- and probiotics on immune response to the influenza vaccination. According to the existing literature, participants who took prebiotics or probiotics were found to have higher hemagglutination inhibition (HI) antibodies, meaning a reduced likelihood of the virus attaching to the host’s red blood cells. Based on these results, the authors conclude both pre- or probiotic supplementation may enhance immune response in three influenza strains. While these results are promising, larger controlled trials are warranted to confirm the effectiveness and establish best clinical practice for supplementation.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Influenza infection is a common disease with a huge disease burden. Influenza vaccination has been widely used, but concerns regarding vaccine efficacy exist, especially in the elderly. Probiotics are live microorganisms with immunomodulatory effects and may enhance the immune responses to influenza vaccination. METHODS We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the influence of prebiotics/probiotics/synbiotics supplementation on vaccine responses to influenza vaccination. Studies were systematically identified from electronic databases up to July 2017. Information regarding study population, influenza vaccination, components of supplements, and immune responses were extracted and analyzed. Twelve studies, investigating a total of 688 participants, were included in this review. RESULTS Patients with prebiotics/probiotics supplements were found to have higher influenza hemagglutination inhibition antibody titers after vaccination (for A/H1N1, 42.89 vs 35.76, mean difference =7.14, 95% CI =2.73, 11.55, P=0.002; for A/H3N2, 105.4 vs 88.25, mean difference =17.19, 95% CI =3.39, 30.99, P=0.01; for B strain, 34.87 vs 30.73, mean difference =4.17, 95% CI =0.37, 7.96, P=0.03). CONCLUSION Supplementation with prebiotics or probiotics may enhance the influenza hemagglutination inhibition antibody titers in all A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B strains (20%, 19.5%, and 13.6% increases, respectively). Concomitant prebiotics or probiotics supplementation with influenza vaccination may hold great promise for improving vaccine efficacy. However, high heterogeneity was observed and further studies are warranted.
-
6.
Effect of Probiotics and Prebiotics on Immune Response to Influenza Vaccination in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Lei, WT, Shih, PC, Liu, SJ, Lin, CY, Yeh, TL
Nutrients. 2017;9(11)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The influenza virus causes three to five million severe cases per year and currently the main way to minimise both morbidity and mortality is the influenza vaccine. Both prebiotics and probiotics have been shown to demonstrate protective effects against influenza infection. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to explore the effectiveness of probiotics and prebiotics on immune function in adults after an influenza vaccine. According to the existing literature, participants who took prebiotics or probiotics showed significant improvements in the immune response for three different strains of influenza vaccine. According to these results, the authors conclude that both pre- and pro- biotics can be used in adults prior to a seasonal influenza vaccine. Further large trials are required to both validate these findings as well as have a better understanding of the optimal dose and duration of supplementation.
Abstract
We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of probiotics and prebiotics on the immune response to influenza vaccination in adults. We conducted a literature search of Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Airiti Library, and PerioPath Index to Taiwan Periodical Literature in Taiwan. Databases were searched from inception to July 2017. We used the Cochrane Review risk of bias assessment tool to assess randomized controlled trial (RCT) quality. A total of 20 RCTs comprising 1979 adults were included in our systematic review. Nine RCTs including 623 participants had sufficient data to be pooled in a meta-analysis. Participants who took probiotics or prebiotics showed significant improvements in the H1N1 strain seroprotection rate (with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.83 and a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.19-2.82, p = 0.006, I² = 0%), the H3N2 strain seroprotection rate (OR = 2.85, 95% CI = 1.59-5.10, p < 0.001, I² = 0%), and the B strain seroconversion rate (OR = 2.11, 95% CI = 1.38-3.21, p < 0.001, I² = 0%). This meta-analysis suggested that probiotics and prebiotics are effective in elevating immunogenicity by influencing seroconversion and seroprotection rates in adults inoculated with influenza vaccines.