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.
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.
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.