-
1.
Efficacy of probiotic adjuvant therapy for irritable bowel syndrome in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Xu, HL, Zou, LL, Chen, MB, Wang, H, Shen, WM, Zheng, QH, Cui, WY
PloS one. 2021;(8):e0255160
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) affects children's quality of life and learning. The purpose of this research was to systematically evaluate the efficacy of probiotic adjuvant therapy for IBS in children. METHODS The Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Clinical Trials databases were electronically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published prior to January 2021 exploring the use of probiotic adjuvant therapy for IBS in children. Strict screening and quality evaluations of the eligible articles were performed independently by 2 researchers. Outcome indexes were extracted, and a meta-analysis of the data was performed using RevMan 5.4.1 and STATA 16 software. Finally, the risk of bias in the included studies was assessed with the RCT bias risk assessment tool recommended in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (5.1.0). RESULTS A total of nine RCTs were included. In children, probiotics significantly reduced the abdominal pain score (I2 = 95%, SMD = -1.15, 95% (-2.05, -0.24), P = 0.01) and Subject's Global Assessment of Relief (SGARC) score (I2 = 95%, MD = -3.84, 95% (-6.49, -1.20), P = 0.004), increased the rate of abdominal pain treatment success (I2 = 0%, RR = 3.44, 95% (1.73, 6.87), P = 0.0005) and abdominal pain relief (I2 = 40%, RR = 1.48, 95% (0.96, 2.28), P = 0.08), and reduced the frequency of abdominal pain (I2 = 2%, MD = -0.82, 95% (-1.57, -0.07), P = 0.03). However, we found that it might not be possible to relieve abdominal pain by increasing the daily intake of probiotics. CONCLUSIONS Probiotics are effective at treating abdominal pain caused by IBS in children, however, there was no significant correlation between abdominal pain and the amount of probiotics ingested. More attention should be given to IBS in children, and a standardized evaluation should be adopted.
-
2.
Pharmacological treatments of Chinese herbal medicine for irritable bowel syndrome in adults: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Wu, YB, Dai, YK, Zhang, L, Pan, HG, Chen, WJ, Li, RL, Hu, L
PloS one. 2021;(8):e0255665
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Plenty of clinical studies have suggested the value of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM) for patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but their efficacy and safety have not been systematically concluded yet. This article aimed to compare and rank the therapeutic effect and safety of CHM with routine pharmacotherapies and placebo in the treatment of IBS. METHODS Randomized controlled trials regarding CHM to treat IBS were searched in six databases from inception to Jan 31, 2020. A network meta-analysis was conducted to analyze the data of included publications. The quality assessment was assessed by Cochrane Handbook and GRADEpro software. The risk ratio was calculated for dichotomous outcomes while the standardized mean difference was used for continuous variables with 95% credible intervals. A Funnel plot was performed to evaluate publication bias. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve was conducted to rank the included interventions. Data were analyzed with STATA 15.0 and Review Manager 5.3. RESULT 3194 records were searched, and 28 eligible trials involving 3323 patients ere identified. Compared with conventional therapies and placebo, Jianpi-Chushi therapy showed significant improvement in adequate relief and IBS symptom severity scale; Shugan-Jianpi therapy showed the best efficacy in relieving the abdominal pain and abdominal distension; Wenshen-Jianpi therapy had a better effect on avoiding adverse effects and improving stool character. CONCLUSION This study confirmed that CHM could be beneficial for patients with IBS in relieving their clinical symptoms and should be recommended as alternative therapies. The quality of evidence in this study based on the GRADE system was "low".
-
3.
Western herbal medicines in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Hawrelak, JA, Wohlmuth, H, Pattinson, M, Myers, SP, Goldenberg, JZ, Harnett, J, Cooley, K, Van De Venter, C, Reid, R, Whitten, DL
Complementary therapies in medicine. 2020;:102233
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy of Western herbal medicines in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). DESIGN A computer-based search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, GreenFILE, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, and the Cochrane Library was conducted. A hand-search of the bibliographies of relevant papers and previous meta-analyses and reviews was also undertaken. Trials were included in the review if they were double-blind and placebo-controlled investigating the effects of Western herbal medicines on IBS-related symptoms or quality of life. There were no language restrictions. Eligibility assessment and data extraction were performed by two independent researchers. For herbal medicines where there was more than 1 trial of similar design, data were synthesised using relative risk of symptoms improving using the random effects model. RESULTS Thirty-three trials were identified that met all eligibility criteria. Seventeen of these evaluated peppermint essential oil, fifteen other Western herbal medicines, and one trial evaluated peppermint oil in one arm and aniseed essential oil in the other arm. Eighteen different herbal preparations were evaluated in these trials. Data suggests that a number of Western herbal medicines may provide relief of IBS symptoms. Meta-analyses suggest that peppermint essential oil is both efficacious and well-tolerated in the short-term management of IBS. Aloe vera and asafoetida also demonstrated efficacy in reducing global IBS symptoms in meta-analyses. The herbal formulas STW 5, STW 5-II and Carmint, along with Ferula assa-foetida, Pimpenella anisum oil, the combination of Curcumin and Foeniculum vulgare oil, and the blend of Schinopsis lorentzii, Aesculus hippocastanum, and peppermint essential oil also demonstrated efficacy in rigorously-designed clinical trials. CONCLUSION A number of Western herbal medicines show promise in the treatment of IBS. With the exception of peppermint essential oil, Aloe vera, and asafoetida, however, none of the positive trials have been replicated. This lack of replication limits the capacity to make definitive statements of efficacy for these herbal medicines.
-
4.
Gut Microbial Dysbiosis in the Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Case-Control Studies.
Wang, L, Alammar, N, Singh, R, Nanavati, J, Song, Y, Chaudhary, R, Mullin, GE
Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. 2020;(4):565-586
Abstract
BACKGROUND Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is the most common functional digestive condition in the industrialized world. The gut microbiota plays a key role in disease pathogenesis. OBJECTIVE A systematic review and meta-analysis on case-control studies was conducted to determine whether there is gut microbial dysbiosis in participants with IBS in comparison with healthy controls and, if so, whether the dysbiosis pattern differs among IBS subtypes and geographic regions. METHODS This review was conducted and reported according to the MOOSE (Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) 2000 and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2009 guidelines. Research articles published up to May 9, 2018 were identified through MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library), ClinicalTrials.gov, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Case-control studies of participants with IBS who had undergone quantitative gut microbial stool analysis were included. The primary exposure measure of interest is log10 bacterial counts per gram of stool. Meta-analyses were performed to estimate the mean difference (MD) in gut microbiota between participants with IBS and healthy controls using the random-effects model with inverse variance in Revman 5.3 and R 3.5.1. Publication bias was assessed with funnel plots and Egger's test. Between-study heterogeneity was analyzed using Higgins I2 statistic with 95% CIs. RESULTS There were 6,333 unique articles identified; 52 qualified for full-text screening. Of these, 23 studies were included for analysis (n=1,340 participants from North America, Europe, and Asia). Overall, the studies were moderate in quality. Comparing participants with IBS to healthy controls, lower fecal Lactobacillus (MD= -0.57 log10 colony-forming unit [CFU]/g; P<0.01) and Bifidobacterium (MD= -1.04 log10CFU/g; P<0.01), higher Escherichia coli (MD=0.60 log10CFU/g; P<0.01), and marginally higher Enterobacter (MD=0.74 log10CFU/g; P=0.05). No difference was found between participants with IBS and healthy controls in fecal Bacteroides and Enterococcus (P=0.18 and 0.68, respectively). Publication bias was not observed except in Bifidobacterium (P=0.015). Subgroup analyses on participants with diarrhea-predominant and constipation-predominant IBS showed consistent results with the primary results. A subgroup analysis of Chinese studies was consistent with the primary results, except for fecal Bacteroides, which was increased in participants with IBS vs healthy controls (MD=0.29; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.46; P<0.01). Although substantial heterogeneity was detected (I2>75%) in most comparisons, the direction of the effect estimates is relatively consistent across studies. CONCLUSIONS IBS is characterized by gut microbial dysbiosis. Prospective, large-scale studies are needed to delineate how gut microbial profiles can be used to guide targeted therapies in this challenging patient population.
-
5.
The efficacy and safety of probiotics for patients with constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on seventeen randomized controlled trials.
Wen, Y, Li, J, Long, Q, Yue, CC, He, B, Tang, XG
International journal of surgery (London, England). 2020;:111-119
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND & Objectives: Constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C) is functional bowel disorders that may involve disturbance of the gastrointestinal microbiota. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of probiotics in patients with IBS-C. METHODS We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science databases up to 1 May 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving adults with IBS-C that compared probiotics to placebo or no therapy were eligible for the analysis. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to calculate the relative risk (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of remaining symptoms after therapy. Continuous data were pooled using a standardized or weighted mean difference (MD) with the 95% CI. Two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data independently. The analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.2. RESULTS Seventeen RCTs involving 1469 patients were included in the analysis. Overall, probiotics significantly increased stool frequency by 1.29 bowel movements (BM)/wk (95% CI: 0.69 to 1.89 BM/wk; P < 0.0001), and improved stool consistency (SMD: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.27 to 0.82; P = 0.0001). Compared with placebo, patients using probiotics experienced a shorter gut transit time by 12.36 h (95% CI: -20.74 to -3.98 h; P = 0.004). No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS Generally, probiotics may be safe and may improve whole gut transit time, stool frequency, and stool consistency. However, adequately powered RCTs are required to better determine the species or strains, doses, and duration of use of probiotics that are most efficacious. Further research and evidence is required before probiotics is adopted as one of treatments of IBS-C.
-
6.
Alterations in fecal short-chain fatty acids in patients with irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Sun, Q, Jia, Q, Song, L, Duan, L
Medicine. 2019;(7):e14513
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recent studies indicate that gut microbiota disorders potentially contribute to the pathogenesis of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), which can be partly reflected by fecal short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) generated from gut microbiota. Previous studies on SCFA alterations in patients with IBS have yielded conflicting results. No prior systematic review has been conducted on the alterations in fecal SCFAs in IBS patients. AIMS We performed a meta-analysis to explore and clarify alterations in fecal SCFAs in IBS patients. METHODS Case-control studies, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and self-controlled studies were identified through electronic database searches. The standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in fecal SCFA levels between different groups was calculated. RESULTS The proportion of fecal propionate in patients with IBS was significantly higher than in healthy controls (HCs) (SMD = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.12, 0.76). A subgroup analysis showed that the concentration of fecal propionate (SMD = -0.91, 95% CI = -1.41, -0.41) and butyrate (SMD = -0.53, 95% CI = -1.01, -0.04) in patients with constipation-predominant IBS (IBS-C) was significantly lower than that in HCs, and the concentration of fecal butyrate in patients with diarrhea-predominant IBS (IBS-D) was higher than that in HCs (SMD = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.00, 0.67). Finally, we found that restricted diets correlated with fecal butyrate reduction in IBS (SMD = -0.26, 95% CI = -0.51, -0.01). CONCLUSIONS In terms of fecal SCFAs, there were differences between patients with IBS and HCs. In IBS-C patients, propionate and butyrate were reduced, whereas butyrate was increased in IBS-D patients in comparison to HCs. Propionate and butyrate could be used as biomarkers for IBS diagnosis.
-
7.
Efficacy of different probiotic protocols in irritable bowel syndrome: A network meta-analysis.
Liang, D, Longgui, N, Guoqiang, X
Medicine. 2019;(27):e16068
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Probiotics is a prevalence therapeutic method for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but there is lack of comparison in different protocols. We aim to differentiate the reasonable protocols by assessing the efficacy and safety through the combined way of traditional and network meta-analysis. METHOD PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from January 2006 to April 2019. The relative risk (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to combine dichotomous data of responders. RESULT Among 14 studies included 1695 patients were identified as suitable for inclusion. The proportion of responders was associated with the administration of multispecies probiotics (RR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.19-1.61) and the dose of 10∼10 (RR: 2.08; 95% CI: 1.59-2.71). In network meta-analysis, the protocol of DUO had a significant effect for diarrhea type of IBS compared with placebo (RR: 7.46; 95% CI: 2.00-32.23). In the rest of 4 protocols, no significant difference was found in each other except F19 which appears inferior when compared with Pro (RR: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.03-0.88). Meanwhile, Pro showed a superior effect for undifferentiated-type IBS compared with placebo (RR: 7.16; 95% CI: 1.72-29.89). No probiotics-associated severe adverse event was reported in included studies. CONCLUSION Probiotics is a safety choice to improve the overall symptoms for IBS patient. The protocols with suitable dose combined of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium can have prepotent effects compared with single species or over-dosage protocols. Network meta-analysis shows that DUO may be the first recommendation for diarrhea-type IBS. In the remaining 4 regimes of this study, Pro has a high rank for undifferentiated-type IBS.
-
8.
Probiotics, prebiotics, and low FODMAP diet for irritable bowel syndrome - What is the current evidence?
Ooi, SL, Correa, D, Pak, SC
Complementary therapies in medicine. 2019;:73-80
Abstract
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is one of the most common functional gastrointestinal disorders worldwide. While the pathogenesis is not clearly understood, current research points to the role of the gut microbiome and alterations in the diversity of the microbiota. Probiotics, prebiotics, and low FODMAP diet are therapeutic means associated with modification of the gut microbiome for the alleviation of IBS symptoms. This narrative review assesses the current evidence on the efficacy of these treatment options based on findings from recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses published from October 2013 to October 2018. There is a general agreement in the 11 included systematic reviews and meta-analyses that probiotic therapy is safe and can be effective in improving overall IBS symptom scores and abdominal pain in the general IBS population. Nonetheless, conflicting findings remain and no recommendation on the specific species/strains or combination can be made. Short-term restriction of FODMAP in the diet can improve IBS symptoms as per the findings of 7 systematic reviews and meta-analyses, even though the quality of the evidence remains questionable. Inappropriate use of the low FODMAP diet can potentially impact health negatively. As such, a low FODMAP diet is only recommended as a second line treatment guided by qualified clinicians with specialized training. Despite preclinical studies of some prebiotics demonstrated the potential use in improving gut microbiome and intestinal inflammatory response, the beneficial effect of prebiotics for IBS remains theoretical. Two systematic reviews found no evidence to support the clinical use of prebiotics for IBS.
-
9.
Colonic immune cells in irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Bashashati, M, Moossavi, S, Cremon, C, Barbaro, MR, Moraveji, S, Talmon, G, Rezaei, N, Hughes, PA, Bian, ZX, Choi, CH, et al
Neurogastroenterology and motility. 2018;(1)
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Increases in mucosal immune cells have frequently been observed in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients. However, this finding is not completely consistent between studies, possibly due to a combination of methodological variability, population differences and small sample sizes. We performed a meta-analysis of case-control studies that compared immune cell counts in colonic biopsies of IBS patients and controls. METHODS PubMed and Embase were searched in February 2017. Results were pooled using standardized mean difference (SMD) and were considered significant when zero was not within the 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed based on I2 statistics where I2 ≤ 50% and I2 > 50% indicated fixed and random effect models, respectively. KEY RESULTS Twenty-two studies on 706 IBS patients and 401 controls were included. Mast cells were increased in the rectosigmoid (SMD: 0.38 [95% CI: 0.06-0.71]; P = .02) and descending colon (SMD: 1.69 [95% CI: 0.65-2.73]; P = .001) of IBS patients. Increased mast cells were observed in both constipation (IBS-C) and diarrhea predominant IBS (IBS-D). CD3+ T cells were increased in the rectosigmoid (SMD: 0.53 [95% CI: 0.21-0.85]; P = .001) and the descending colon of the IBS patients (SMD: 0.79, 95% CI [0.28-1.30]; P = .002). This was possibly in relation to higher CD4+ T cells in IBS (SMD: 0.33 [95% CI: 0.01-0.65]; P = .04) as there were no differences in CD8+ T cells. CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES Mast cells and CD3+ T cells are increased in colonic biopsies of patients with IBS vs non-inflamed controls. These changes are segmental and sometimes IBS-subtype dependent. The diagnostic value of the quantification of colonic mucosal cells in IBS requires further investigation.
-
10.
Low fermentable, oligo-, di-, mono-saccharides and polyol diet in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Schumann, D, Klose, P, Lauche, R, Dobos, G, Langhorst, J, Cramer, H
Nutrition (Burbank, Los Angeles County, Calif.). 2018;:24-31
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The aim of this review was to systematically assess and meta-analyze the effects of a low fermentable, oligo-, di-, mono-saccharides and polyol (FODMAP) diet (LFD) on the severity of symptoms, quality of life, and safety in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). METHODS The MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases were screened through January 19, 2016. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared LFD to other diets were included if they assessed symptoms of IBS or abdominal pain in patients with IBS. Safety, quality of life, anxiety, depression, and effect on gut microbiota were defined as secondary outcomes. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. RESULTS Nine RCTs with a total of 596 subjects were included. Three RCTs compared LFD with a habitual diet, two RCTs provided all meals and compared LFD with a western diet, one RCT each compared LFD with a diet high in FODMAPs or a sham diet, and two RCTs compared with other diet recommendations for IBS. A meta-analysis revealed significant group differences for LFD compared with other diets with regard to gastrointestinal symptoms (SMD = -0.62; 95% CI = -0.93 to -0.31; P = 0.0001), abdominal pain (SMD = -0.50; 95% CI = -0.77 to -0.22; P = 0.008), and health-related quality of life (SMD = 0.36; 95% CI = 0.10-0.62; P = 0.007). Three studies reported a significant reduction in luminal bifidobacteria after LFD. Adverse events were assessed in three RCTs only and no intervention-related adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS This meta-analysis found evidence of the short-term efficacy and safety of LFD in patients with IBS. However, only a preliminary recommendation for LFD can be made until long-term effects are investigated.