-
1.
Impact of probiotics on muscle mass, muscle strength and lean mass: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Prokopidis, K, Giannos, P, Kirwan, R, Ispoglou, T, Galli, F, Witard, OC, Triantafyllidis, KK, Kechagias, KS, Morwani-Mangnani, J, Ticinesi, A, et al
Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle. 2023;14(1):30-44
-
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Sarcopenia is a progressive skeletal muscle disorder involving accelerated loss of muscle mass, strength and function. It generally occurs in older age groups but can also be seen in younger people. Multiple factors contribute to the development of the condition. Besides nutritional management strategies, probiotics have recently caught the interest of researchers. As probiotics promote metabolic building activity, aid digestion and absorption and reduce muscle breakdown by favourably managing inflammation, they present great potential for the management of sarcopenia. This systematic review and meta-analysis explored the impact of probiotic supplementation on muscle mass, total lean mass and muscle strength in human adults. The review included 24 studies, with probiotics mainly from the Bifidobacteria or Lactobacilli family. The analysis concluded that probiotic supplementation improved muscle mass in comparison to placebos. It also significantly increased overall muscle strength in 6 randomized controlled trials, which was most obvious in age groups of 50 and above. However, no changes were seen concerning total lean mass. It appeared that longer studies, of >12 weeks or more, showed better outcomes in this review. Furthermore, Bifidobacteria species seemed to exhibit more favourable effects, and the authors also noted the beneficial results were more significant in Asian populations. Further research is needed to understand more about the underlying mechanism, best probiotics strains and the specifics of different demographic groups. This article yields a concise overview of sarcopenia, the nutritional aspects of the disease and how probiotics may be beneficial in disease management, strengthened with data from the review.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- This was a well-conducted meta-analysis based on its methodological approach that demonstrated that Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium probiotic supplementation may contribute to improved muscle mass in younger adults and improved muscle strength in older adults.
- Bifidobacterium probiotic supplementation was associated with enhanced muscle mass in younger adults, a potential focus for those considering probiotic supplements.
- The duration of probiotic therapy matters, with longer-term (12 weeks or more) supplementation showing improvements in muscle mass and strength..
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:
Introduction
This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effect of probiotics on muscle mass, total lean mass and muscle strength in both young and older adults.
Methods
- The search encompassed PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases, from inception up to June 2022; studies included spanned a period from 2013 to June 2022.
- The study adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines and included the Risk-of-Bias tool to assess study quality.
- The study focused on changes in muscle mass, total lean mass, and muscle strength.
- Inclusion criteria: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with adult participants (>18 years); interventions involving any probiotics, and a control group receiving either no treatment or a placebo.
Results
- 24 RCTs were included (709 participants), with studies conducted in Europe, USA, and Asia. Intervention durations: ranged from 3 weeks to 12 months.
- Participants included overweight, untrained healthy and resistance-trained individuals, and those with specific conditions like metabolic syndrome and frailty.
- Body composition assessments were conducted using bioelectrical impedance (BIA) and/or dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA).
- Probiotic strains employed in the included studies varied, with Lactobacillus the most common, followed by Bifidobacterium; some combined both. 5 of 24 studies also used additional strains.
- Dosages: ranged from 2 × 10^9 to 11.2 × 10^10 colony-forming units (CFU).
- 4 out of 24 studies used fermented food products like cheese and noodles as sources of probiotics.
- 22 RCTs measured muscle mass and total lean mass; 6 RCTs measured global muscle strength.
- Probiotic supplementation (≥12 weeks) moderately increased muscle mass, with a standardised mean difference (SMD) of 0.42. This significant effect (95% CI: 0.10–0.74, P=0.009) was observed only in younger Asian adults (<50 years) after Bifidobacterium supplementation, based on a meta-analysis of 10 studies.
- Probiotic supplementation (≥12 weeks) significantly increased global muscle strength in older adults (>50 years; SMD: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.33–1.06, P = 0.0002).
- Probiotic supplementation showed no significant impact on lean mass (SMD: -0.03, 95% CI: 0.19 – 0.13, P = 0.69).
Conclusion
Probiotic supplementation, especially Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium may have a positive impact on muscle mass and global strength
Clinical practice applications:
- Consumption of probiotics, mainly Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium may contribute to improved muscle strength in older individuals (>50y).
- Consumption of Bifidobacterium strains was associated with improved muscle mass in younger individuals (<50y) in Asian countries, in a low number of studies (k=2).
- Bifidobacterium breve B-3 was associated with an improvement in muscle mass in older overweight individuals, although a causal relationship was not established.
- Probiotics may enhance muscle mass or strength by enhancing protein digestion and amino acid absorption for muscle synthesis and function.
- Considering an individual’s goals, a practitioner could consider probiotic supplementation as a complementary intervention when aiming to enhance muscle mass or strength .
Considerations for future research:
- Future research could focus on pinpointing which specific probiotic strains are most effective for muscle strength or muscle mass to tailor more precise interventions.
- Most studies did not exceed 12 weeks, highlighting the need for long-term research on probiotics sustained muscle impact.
- Future research could investigate the effects of probiotics across diverse demographic groups including different ages, sexes, and ethnic backgrounds to understand the impact in different populations.
- Delving deeper into the mechanisms by which probiotics influence muscle health could lead to targeted probiotic therapies that address specific physiological pathways.
- Finally, future research could explore how probiotics can be combined with other interventions, such as exercise or nutritional modifications, to synergistically improve muscle health and function.
Abstract
Probiotics have shown potential to counteract sarcopenia, although the extent to which they can influence domains of sarcopenia such as muscle mass and strength in humans is unclear. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to explore the impact of probiotic supplementation on muscle mass, total lean mass and muscle strength in human adults. A literature search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted through PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library from inception until June 2022. Eligible RCTs compared the effect of probiotic supplementation versus placebo on muscle and total lean mass and global muscle strength (composite score of all muscle strength outcomes) in adults (>18 years). To evaluate the differences between groups, a meta-analysis was conducted using the random effects inverse-variance model by utilizing standardized mean differences. Twenty-four studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis exploring the effects of probiotics on muscle mass, total lean mass and global muscle strength. Our main analysis (k = 10) revealed that muscle mass was improved following probiotics compared with placebo (SMD: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.10-0.74, I2 = 57%, P = 0.009), although no changes were revealed in relation to total lean mass (k = 12; SMD: -0.03, 95% CI: -0.19 - 0.13, I2 = 0%, P = 0.69). Interestingly, a significant increase in global muscle strength was also observed among six RCTs (SMD: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.33-1.06, I2 = 64%, P = 0.0002). Probiotic supplementation enhances both muscle mass and global muscle strength; however, no beneficial effects were observed in total lean mass. Investigating the physiological mechanisms underpinning different ageing groups and elucidating appropriate probiotic strains for optimal gains in muscle mass and strength are warranted.
-
2.
Effect of the probiotic strain, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum P9, on chronic constipation: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Ma, T, Yang, N, Xie, Y, Li, Y, Xiao, Q, Li, Q, Jin, H, Zheng, L, Sun, Z, Zuo, K, et al
Pharmacological research. 2023;191:106755
-
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Chronic constipation (CC) is a common gastroenterological problem encountered in clinical practice, and it negatively impacts patients’ quality of life. Growing evidence indicates that the occurrence of CC is closely linked to gut dysbiosis. Several main probiotics have been used to relieve constipation. The main aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the beneficial effects of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum P9 (P9) administration on alleviating CC and impact on the host gut microbiota and its metabolites. This study was a 42-day longitudinal double-blind randomised controlled trial which enrolled a total of 181 patients with CC. Subjects were randomly assigned to the probiotic or placebo group. Subjects in P9 group received one sachet of P9 powder per day after meal. Results show that P9 administration significantly improved patients’ defecation frequency. In fact, P9 administration effectively alleviated constipation, and the symptom relief effects were linked to desired changes and interactions with different types of host microbes. Authors conclude that administering P9 could effectively relieve chronic constipation in adults and improve some aspects of their quality of life.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- This study suggested that P9-associated constipation symptom relief was not attributed to macroscopic changes in the host gut bacteriome and phageome
- However, results supported that taking P9 could alleviate constipation, with the symptom relief effects linked to desired changes and interactions with different types of host microbes, including the gut commensal bacteria (L. plantarum, Ruminococcus_B gnavus, Oscillospiraceae sp., Lachnospiraceae sp.) and the bacteriophage family, Herelleviridae.
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:
Introduction
This study investigated the effect of a specific probiotic strain in alleviating Chronic Constipation (CC).
Methods
- The study employed a 42-day randomised control trial (RTC) double-blind, placebo-controlled design, with 163 patients, (mean age =22.68 ±5.66 years for the probiotic group and 21.59 ±4.59 years for the placebo group), diagnosed with CC (Rome IV criteria)
- The male to female ratio was 15–63 and 17–68 in probiotic and placebo groups respectively
- Groups were standardised with no differences observed in baseline age, gender ratio, drug treatment, high-fibre diet and smoking between the two groups (P >0.18)
- Participants were randomly assigned to the probiotic Lactiplantibacillis plantarum P9 (n=78; 2 g per sachet, 1 ×1011 CFU/day) or the placebo (n =85; maltodextrin powder) groups.
Results
Primary outcomes: weekly mean complete spontaneous bowel movements (CSBMs):
- At 28-days CSBM was 28% higher in the P9 group (P=0.039) compared with the placebo group
- At 42-days CSBM remained significantly higher in the P9 group (P=0.026) compared with the placebo group, and increased 2-fold compared with baseline (P <0.05)
- Authors noted that the CSBM benefits were maintained even after 14 days of not taking the supplement.
Secondary outcomes: The effects of P9 supplementation on constipation-related parameters, including the weekly mean frequency of spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) demonstrated:
- After 28-days of P9 supplementation, SBMs were 12% higher than the placebo group (P=0.039)
- No differences were observed in the weekly mean stool consistency and straining scores between groups (P>0.05).
Patients’ quality of life and psychological state, using a PAC-QOL questionnaire related to: worries and concerns (WO), physical discomfort, psychosocial discomfort, and satisfaction and found:
- At day 14 WO in the P9 group was 1.22-fold lower than those in the placebo group (P <0.05)
- No differences in the other 3 items between P9 and placebo groups (P >0.05) were observed
- Supplementation resulted in a significant change in relative abundance of the P9 genome (≥0.01%)
- However, no differences were observed in alpha diversity after P9 consumption compared with placebo.
Conclusion
- The results indicated that P9 administration alleviated patients’ constipation symptoms and improved their quality of life but did not impact on gut bacteria or phageome
- Lactiplantibacillis plantarum P9 supplementation impacted several beneficial bacteria species (e.g. (Lactiplantibacillus plantarum and Ruminococcus_B gnavus), and reduced levels of other bacteria and phage taxa (e.g. Oscillospiraceae sp., Lachnospiraceae sp., and Herelleviridae) which may be implicated in constipation relief mechanisms.
Clinical practice applications:
- In this study, the use of P9 administration significantly improved patients’ defecation frequency which could have beneficial implications for patients suffering from chronic constipation
- Probiotic effects are known to be strain- and host-specific, and based on this study P9 administration for relief of constipation needs to be taken for at least two weeks to improve aspects of patients’ quality of life and 4 weeks for improvements in constipation.
Considerations for future research:
- Future trials should include factors that impact gut motility and constipation symptoms, such as: a detailed daily diet (dietary composition, fibre content, and water intake) and physical activity scale (intensity and duration), and longer term use of P9 or comparison across strains
- The relatively small study size and short duration of this study, as well as the younger age groups included may be pertinent when considering future research.
Abstract
Chronic constipation (CC) is a common gastrointestinal condition associated with intestinal inflammation, and the condition considerably impairs patients' quality of life. We conducted a large-scale 42-day randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to investigate the effect of probiotics in alleviating CC. 163 patients diagnosed with CC (following Rome IV criteria) were randomly divided into probiotic (n = 78; received Lactiplantibacillus plantarum P9 [P9]; 1 ×1011 CFU/day) and placebo (n = 85; received placebo material) groups. Ingesting P9 significantly improved the weekly mean frequency of complete spontaneous bowel movements (CSBMs) and spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs), while significantly reducing the level of worries and concerns (WO; P < 0.05). Comparing with the placebo group, P9 group was significantly enriched in potentially beneficial bacteria (Lactiplantibacillus plantarum and Ruminococcus_B gnavus), while depriving of several bacterial and phage taxa (Oscillospiraceae sp., Lachnospiraceae sp., and Herelleviridae; P < 0.05). Interesting significant correlations were also observed between some clinical parameters and subjects' gut microbiome, including: negative correlation between Oscillospiraceae sp. and SBMs; positive correlation between WO and Oscillospiraceae sp., Lachnospiraceae sp. Additionally, P9 group had significantly (P < 0.05) more predicted gut microbial bioactive potential involved in the metabolism of amino acids (L-asparagine, L-pipecolinic acid), short-/medium-chain fatty acids (valeric acid and caprylic acid). Furthermore, several metabolites (p-cresol, methylamine, trimethylamine) related to the intestinal barrier and transit decreased significantly after P9 administration (P < 0.05). In short, the constipation relief effect of P9 intervention was accompanied by desirable changes in the fecal metagenome and metabolome. Our findings support the notion of applying probiotics in managing CC.
-
3.
Probiotics fortify intestinal barrier function: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Zheng, Y, Zhang, Z, Tang, P, Wu, Y, Zhang, A, Li, D, Wang, CZ, Wan, JY, Yao, H, Yuan, CS
Frontiers in immunology. 2023;14:1143548
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Intestinal barrier function is closely related to the pathogenesis of various immune and inflammatory diseases. The intestinal microbiota plays an essential role in maintaining gut homeostasis and functionality in the presence of pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory microbes. The aim of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the role of probiotics in contributing to intestinal barrier function, and the related immune function, inflammatory status, and gut microbiota composition. This study was a systematic review of 28 articles (qualitative synthesis), and a meta-analysis of 26 randomised controlled trials. Results showed that probiotics could significantly improve intestinal barrier function according to specific indicators. The meta-analysis also indicated that probiotic supplementation could reduce inflammatory factors. Furthermore, it also demonstrated that probiotics could modulate gut microbiota compositions by elevating the abundances of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus. Authors conclude that probiotics could improve intestinal barrier function to some extent, but more high-quality randomised controlled studies are needed to reach a solid conclusion.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
The probiotics Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus may be beneficial for health by addressing imbalances in gut bacteria (dysbiosis), reducing inflammation in the gut and improving the integrity and function of the gut barrier
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:
Introduction
Probiotics are microorganisms that are considered beneficial to health. The aim of this study was to assess the role of probiotics in protecting intestinal barrier function as well as their effects on the composition of gut microbiota, inflammatory status, and immune function for reducing the risk of related diseases.
Methods
26 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2005-2021 with a total population of n=1891 (n = 955 Intervention, n = 936 controls)) were included in the meta-analysis. Outcome measures were categorised under indicators relating to intestinal barrier function, inflammatory markers, immune function and microbiota composition. Studies were conducted worldwide with participants being healthcare patients or athletes. Study durations ranged from 3 days to 6 months. Different dosages and forms of probiotics were used. Data was pooled for Bifidobacterium, Lactobacillus, Enterobacteriaceae and Enterococcus species.
Results
Gut barrier function in the probiotic groups was improved as measured by transepithelial resistance (TER) mean difference (MD) 5.27 {95% CI, 3.82 to 6.72, p = < 0.00001], lipopolysaccharide (LPS) standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.47 (95% CI, -0.85 to -0.09, p = 0.02), serum zonulin SMD -1.58 (95% CI,-2.49 to -0.66, p = 0.0007), and endotoxin SMD -3.20 (95% CI, -5.41 to - 0.98, p = 0.005).
The inflammatory markers interleukin 6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP) and tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-a) were also improved compared to control groups. Lactobacillus (95% CI p=0.02) and Bifidobacterium (95% CI, p=0.01) enhanced microbial composition, however, Enterobacteriaceae and Enterococcus species did not. Immune function as measured by Immunoglobulin A (IgA), Immunoglobulin G IgG and Immunoglobulin M (IgM) were not improved.
Conclusion
The findings of this study suggest that intestinal barrier function and microbial composition could be improved using probiotics. They were also found to help alleviate inflammation. Further studies of high quality are however needed to confirm these results.
No conflicts of interest were reported.
Clinical practice applications:
The use of the probiotics Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus may be beneficial for:
- supporting the integrity of gut barrier function
- improving the composition of gut microbiota
- lowering inflammation
Considerations for future research:
High heterogeneity between studies may affect the applicability of the results. Future research development should focus on the following areas:
- testing methods
- study durations
- measuring indicators
- the type and dose of probiotics
Abstract
BACKGROUND Probiotics play a vital role in treating immune and inflammatory diseases by improving intestinal barrier function; however, a comprehensive evaluation is missing. The present study aimed to explore the impact of probiotics on the intestinal barrier and related immune function, inflammation, and microbiota composition. A systematic review and meta-analyses were conducted. METHODS Four major databases (PubMed, Science Citation Index Expanded, CENTRAL, and Embase) were thoroughly searched. Weighted mean differences were calculated for continuous outcomes with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs), heterogeneity among studies was evaluated utilizing I2 statistic (Chi-Square test), and data were pooled using random effects meta-analyses. RESULTS Meta-analysis of data from a total of 26 RCTs (n = 1891) indicated that probiotics significantly improved gut barrier function measured by levels of TER (MD, 5.27, 95% CI, 3.82 to 6.72, P < 0.00001), serum zonulin (SMD, -1.58, 95% CI, -2.49 to -0.66, P = 0.0007), endotoxin (SMD, -3.20, 95% CI, -5.41 to -0.98, P = 0.005), and LPS (SMD, -0.47, 95% CI, -0.85 to -0.09, P = 0.02). Furthermore, probiotic groups demonstrated better efficacy over control groups in reducing inflammatory factors, including CRP, TNF-α, and IL-6. Probiotics can also modulate the gut microbiota structure by boosting the enrichment of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus. CONCLUSION The present work revealed that probiotics could improve intestinal barrier function, and alleviate inflammation and microbial dysbiosis. Further high-quality RCTs are warranted to achieve a more definitive conclusion. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=281822, identifier CRD42021281822.
-
4.
The effects of probiotic and synbiotic supplementation on inflammation, oxidative stress, and circulating adiponectin and leptin concentration in subjects with prediabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a GRADE-assessed systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression of randomized clinical trials.
Naseri, K, Saadati, S, Ghaemi, F, Ashtary-Larky, D, Asbaghi, O, Sadeghi, A, Afrisham, R, de Courten, B
European journal of nutrition. 2023;62(2):543-561
-
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
When acute, inflammation is a necessary function of the immune system allowing the body to recognise and remove foreign stimuli. However, when chronic inflammation occurs, it can contribute to and exacerbate diseases such as type 2 diabetes (T2D). The gut microbiota and the use of probiotics has been shown to modulate processes within the body and decrease chronic inflammation, however research has not consistently shown this and an inverse relationship has been shown in some studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effect of probiotics and synbiotics on inflammation in individuals with prediabetes and T2D. A total of 32 randomised control trials were included in the meta-analysis and showed that certain, but not all inflammatory markers were reduced. Antioxidants were increased. The effect was especially pronounced in individuals with T2D as opposed to prediabetes. It was concluded that probiotics or synbiotics could be useful for individuals with T2D to reduce inflammation and reduce the risk for other associated diseases such as heart disease.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- Probiotic and synbiotic supplementation may significantly reduce inflammation and oxidative stress, potentially lowering the risk of cardiovascular diseases in those with prediabetes and T2DM.
- These supplements may be particularly beneficial for individuals with T2DM and those who are overweight or obese.
- Incorporating probiotics and synbiotics into the diet could be a supportive strategy for improving metabolic health markers.
- The observed benefits vary depending on the type and duration of supplementation, suggesting that consistent, long-term use might be necessary to achieve noticeable health improvements.
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:
Introduction
This systematic review meta-analysis and meta-regression assessed the impact of probiotics and synbiotics on inflammation, antioxidants, oxidative stress, and adipokines in prediabetes and type 2 diabetes.
Methodology
The methodology involved searching PubMed/MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases without date or language restrictions until March 2022. Study quality was evaluated.
- Inclusion criteria: Adults 18+ with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes; interventions with probiotics or synbiotics versus placebo or other treatments; and reporting on inflammatory biomarkers, adipocytokines, and oxidative stress serum biomarkers in RCTs with parallel or cross-over designs.
Results
32 RCTs with 2074 participants were analysed, mostly in Asia (26 studies) and 5 in Europe, Africa, Oceania, and America, over 4 to 24 weeks. Dosages varied, including synbiotic bread with Lactobacillus sporogenes and inulin (1×10^8 CFU, 0.07g/g, thrice daily), 300ml/day fermented milk with L. helveticus, daily synbiotic and probiotic tablets, a probiotic mixture (120g/day), synbiotics (9g, thrice daily), multistrain probiotic yoghurt (300g/day), L. sporogenes-enriched bread (40g, thrice daily), and probiotic honey (2500mg/day). Measurements included CRP (31 RCTs), TNF-α (12 RCTs), GSH (13 RCTs), MDA (12 RCTs), TAC (11 RCTs), and NO levels (8 trials).
Effects of probiotics and synbiotics:
- significantly reduced CRP levels (-0.62 mg/L, 95% CI: -0.80 to -0.44, p < 0.001, 31 RCTs), showing greater efficacy in T2DM than prediabetes, particularly in individuals with overweight.
- TNF-α levels decreased in participants with T2D or overweight (-0.48 pg/mL, 95% CI: -0.81 to -0.15, p = 0.004, 12 RCTs).
- GSH levels significantly rose (69.80, 95% CI: 33.65 to 105.95, p < 0.001, 13 RCTs), independent of trial duration or baseline BMI.
- MDA levels were significantly reduced (-0.51, 95% CI: -0.73 to -0.30, p < 0.001, 12 RCTs) in studies lasting ≥12 weeks.
- TAC significantly increased (73.59, 95% CI: 33.24 to 113.95, p < 0.001, 11 RCTs), with more pronounced effects in longer trials and with probiotics.
- NO levels improved significantly (7.49, 95% CI: 3.12 to 11.86, p = 0.001, 9 trials) in individuals with obesity.
- Positive impacts on CRP, TNF-α, MDA, and TAC were more marked in trials ≥12 weeks.
Conclusions
Probiotic or synbiotic intake may benefit those with prediabetes and T2DM, reducing CRP, TNF-α, MDA, and enhancing TAC, GSH, NO levels, especially in T2DM individuals. Effects are stronger in individuals with overweight or obesity.
Clinical practice applications:
- Probiotic and synbiotic supplementation could be recommended to reduce inflammatory biomarkers like CRP and TNF-α, especially in individuals with T2DM.
- The improvements in oxidative stress markers, such as increased TAC and GSH and decreased MDA, support the use of probiotic and synbiotic supplements in managing oxidative stress in T2DM and prediabetes.
- Longer durations (≥12 weeks) of probiotic or synbiotic supplementation may offer a more pronounced effect on antioxidant capacity.
- The findings can guide personalised nutritional recommendations, as for example improvement in inflammation biomarkers and NO were more evident in individuals with T2DM or overweight suggesting an anti-inflammatory effect primarily in these groups. Moreover, markers related to antioxidant capacity were improved in those diagnosed with prediabetes or T2DM irrespective of BMI.
Considerations for future research:
- The beneficial effects on inflammatory and antioxidant/oxidative stress markers suggest a need for larger and longer-term studies to solidify the role of probiotics and synbiotics in benefiting chronic conditions like T2DM and prediabetes.
- There is potential for investigating the specific strains of probiotics that are most effective, considering varying outcomes observed across different studies.
- Research could explore the mechanisms by which probiotics and synbiotics exert their beneficial effects, contributing to a better understanding of gut-health interactions.
- The varying responses based on BMI categories indicate a need for personalised nutrition research to optimise probiotic therapy for individual needs.
- Future studies should consider standardising the dosage and formulation of probiotics to determine the most effective therapeutic doses and combinations.
Abstract
PURPOSE Probiotics or synbiotics consumption have been suggested to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) through a decline in inflammation and oxidative stress, however, the results from studies are conflicting. This study filled this knowledge gap by evaluating randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating probiotics or synbiotics intake on adipokines, inflammation, and oxidative stress in patients with prediabetes and type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS We systematically did search up to March 2022 in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, ISI Web of Science, and Cochrane library. A random-effect model was applied to estimate the weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for each outcome. RESULTS A total of 32 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. This intervention led to a significant decrease in levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) (WMD - 0.62 mg/l; 95% CI - 0.80, - 0.44; p < 0.001), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) (WMD - 0.27 pg/ml; 95% CI - 0.44, - 0.10; p = 0.002) and malondialdehyde (MDA) (WMD - 0.51 µmol/l; 95% CI - 0.73, - 0.30; p < 0.001), and also a significant increase in levels of glutathione (GSH) (WMD 69.80 µmol/l; 95% CI 33.65, 105.95; p < 0.001), total antioxidant capacity (TAC) (WMD 73.59 mmol/l; 95% CI 33.24, 113.95; p < 0.001) and nitric oxide (NO) (WMD 7.49 µmol/l; 95% CI 3.12, 11.86; p = 0.001), without significant alterations in interleukin-6 (IL-6) and adipokines levels. CONCLUSION A consumption of probiotics or synbiotics could be a useful intervention to improve cardiometabolic outcomes through a reduced inflammation and oxidative stress in patients with prediabetes and T2DM.
-
5.
The Role of Genetically Engineered Probiotics for Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review.
Zhang, T, Zhang, J, Duan, L
Nutrients. 2023;15(7)
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), largely classified as Crohn’s disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC), is a chronic intestinal inflammatory disorder mediated by genetic, immune, microbial, and environmental factors. The aim of this study was to summarise the efficacy of different genetically modified probiotics compared to wild-type probiotics in the treatment of IBD in animal models and patients and to investigate the specific effects and main mechanisms involved. This study was a systematic review of forty-five preclinical studies and one clinical study. Results showed a protective effect of genetically modified organisms (gm) probiotics in colitis. Several protective mechanisms have been identified: reduction of the pro- to anti-inflammatory cytokine ratio in colonic tissue and plasma, modulation of the activity of oxidative stress in the colon, improvement of intestinal barrier integrity, modulation of the diversity and composition of gut microbiota, and production of favourable metabolites, including short-chain fatty acids, by beneficial bacteria. Authors concluded that gm probiotics are more effective and safer than wild-type probiotics, to facilitate clinical translation.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
Conclusions of this review were largely based on mouse models and although treatment using probiotics is generally considered safe in humans, with only minor side-effects (flatulence), practitioners need to be aware that in an IBD population the use of GM formulations might not be completely without risk.
Evidence Category:
-
A: Meta-analyses, position-stands, randomized-controlled trials (RCTs)
-
X
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:
Introduction
This paper summarises the efficacy of specific genetically modified (GM) probiotic formulations for Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) when compared to wild type probiotics. The aim was to ascertain what specific effects and mechanisms such probiotics have on IBD symptomatology.
Methods
- A total of 46 published articles were included; 45 mouse experimental models (induced acute or chronic colitis) (n=15-130) and 1 human IBD population clinical trial (n=10)
- The effect of GM probiotics were compared to placebo and wild-type probiotics in trials including preclinical studies, randomised controlled trials and cohort studies
- Animals received probiotics via gastric gavage (105 - 4 x 1012 CFU) for 3-6 weeks
- The human placebo-uncontrolled trial lasted 7 days and patients received 10 GM capsules of L.lactis (1 x 1010 CFU) twice daily.
Results
- GM probiotics that secrete immunoregulatory cytokines such as IL-10 appear to reduce intestinal damage
- The human trial using GM L.lactis resulted in 5 patients who went into complete clinical remission (CDAI, <150) with 3 patients exhibiting a clinical response (decrease in CDAI, >70). with only minor adverse events (flatulence)
- However, human cytokines that promote intestinal barrier function and epithelial restitution were not enhanced with oral administration of probiotics
- Two studies concluded that GM L.lactis and S.boulardii, that secrete atrial natriuretic peptide, might be the most effective options in supporting colitis
- GM L.casei resulted in faster recovery from weight loss in acute colitis models
- Superoxide dismutase (SOD) producing GM L.fermentum increased SOD activity by almost eightfold compared to the wild type
- GM Lact. fermentum furthermore showed a higher survival rate and lower disease activity index (P <0·05) in colitis models
- GM L.lactis improved gut microbial composition and GM S.cerevisiae improved microbial diversity whilst reducing the Firmicutes to Bacteroides ratio
- GM E.coli significantly reduced weight loss, colon shortening plus lower disease activity and histological changes (P < 0.05).
Conclusion
Despite the heterogeneity of the trials, GM probiotics appear to play a notable part in ameliorating IBD symptomatology and disease severity when compared to wild-type probiotics. Human efficacy and potential adverse effects require more in-depth trials to ascertain safety and optimal dosages.
Clinical practice applications:
- Probiotics species used in the trials included S.thermophilus, E.coli, L.lactis, B.ovatus, S.boulardii, L.fermentum, B.longhum, L.casei, L.plantarum, and S.cerevisiae. Wild-types of some of these are already available to use in clinical practice
- Note that oral administration in the human trial showed no significant health outcome, therefore efficacy and safety need to be ascertained on an individual patient level
- Colonisation of beneficial bacteria in the gut of IBD patients might be difficult and any form of supplementation therefore needs to be closely monitored.
Considerations for future research:
- More evidence is needed to demonstrate that GM probiotic formulations result in significantly improved outcomes when compared to wild-types
- Future randomised placebo-controlled trials need to include larger cohorts to determine supplement efficacy
- Longer periods of intervention are needed to confirm efficacy, safety, and tolerance for both Crohn’s Disease and Colitis
- Optimal GM probiotic formulation, doses, and means of application need to be identified.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many preclinical studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of genetically modified probiotics (gm probiotics) in animal models of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). OBJECTIVE This systematic review was performed to investigate the role of gm probiotics in treating IBD and to clarify the involved mechanisms. METHODS PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Medline were searched from their inception to 18 September 2022 to identify preclinical and clinical studies exploring the efficacy of gm probiotics in IBD animal models or IBD patients. Two independent researchers extracted data from the included studies, and the data were pooled by the type of study; that is, preclinical or clinical. RESULTS Forty-five preclinical studies were included. In these studies, sodium dextran sulfate and trinitrobenzene sulfonic acid were used to induce colitis. Eleven probiotic species have been genetically modified to produce therapeutic substances, including IL-10, antimicrobial peptides, antioxidant enzymes, and short-chain fatty acids, with potential therapeutic properties against colitis. The results showed generally positive effects of gm probiotics in reducing disease activity and ameliorating intestinal damage in IBD models; however, the efficacy of gm probiotics compared to that of wild-type probiotics in many studies was unclear. The main mechanisms identified include modulation of the diversity and composition of the gut microbiota, production of regulatory metabolites by beneficial bacteria, reduction of the pro- to anti-inflammatory cytokine ratio in colonic tissue and plasma, modulation of oxidative stress activity in the colon, and improvement of intestinal barrier integrity. Moreover, only one clinical trial with 10 patients with Crohn's disease was included, which showed that L. lactis producing IL-10 was safe, and a decrease in disease activity was observed in these patients. CONCLUSIONS Gm probiotics have a certain efficacy in colitis models through several mechanisms. However, given the scarcity of clinical trials, it is important for researchers to pay more attention to gm probiotics that are more effective and safer than wild-type probiotics to facilitate further clinical translation.
-
6.
Comparative analysis of the efficacies of probiotic supplementation and glucose-lowering drugs for the treatment of type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Liang, T, Xie, X, Wu, L, Li, L, Yang, L, Gao, H, Deng, Z, Zhang, X, Chen, X, Zhang, J, et al
Frontiers in nutrition. 2022;9:825897
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a serious medical condition often requiring antidiabetic drug management. Although commonly used antidiabetic drugs effectively control glucose levels, their tolerability profiles differ, causing various side effects. Probiotics can be used as single or multi strains to reduce glycaemic and lipid indicators and avoid the negative effects of antidiabetic medications. The study included twenty-five randomised controlled trials, of which fourteen studies assessed the effectiveness of probiotics (single probiotics, multi-strain probiotics, and probiotics with co-supplements), and eleven studies included different antidiabetic drugs such as Thiazolidinedione (TZD), Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA), Dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors (DPP-4i), and Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i). This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of probiotic and antidiabetic drugs on glycaemia, lipid profile and blood pressure in T2D patients. Probiotics were less effective than specific antidiabetic drugs in reducing fasting blood sugar levels (FBS), HbA1c levels, and triglycerides. Different probiotic formulations were effective in reducing the HOMA-IR index, total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), and systolic and diastolic pressure (SBP and DBP). A subgroup analysis showed a greater reduction in FBS, HbA1c, TC, TG, and SBP in obese and elderly participants, those who participated for a longer duration, and those from Eastern origins. Considering the high heterogeneity in baseline study characteristics among the studies included in this systematic review and meta-analysis, further studies are required to evaluate the effects of probiotics and antidiabetic drugs. However, healthcare professionals can use the study to understand the effect of probiotics and antidiabetic drugs in reducing glycaemic, lipid and hypertension profiles.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- Glucose-lowering drugs, except for DPP-4i, reduced FBS and HbA1c more than probiotics; and SGLT-2i induced the greatest decrease in HbA1c
- A BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 showed a significant decrease in FBS and the HOMA-IR index compared with those with lower BMI
- Weight loss induced by glucose-lowering drugs and probiotic supplementation plays an important role in glycaemic control in obese patients with type 2 diabetes.
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:
Introduction
This meta-analysis compared the effects of probiotics and glucose-lowering drugs thiazolidinedione [TZD], glucagon-like pep-tide-1 receptor agonists [GLP-1 RA], dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors, and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors [SGLT-2i]) on various outcome measures in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).
Methods
A search was performed on PubMed, Web of science, Embase, and Cochrane Library between January 2015 - April 2021.
Results
25 randomised controlled trials (RCT) were included (2843 participants). 14 RCTs (842 participants) involved the administration of single probiotics, multi-strain probiotics, and probiotics with co-supplements, and 11 RCTs (2001 participants) involved TZD, GLP-1 RA, SGLT-2i, and DPP-4i. Participants in 7 of the studies had T2D, aged ≤ 55 years old. 8 RCTs included participants with a mean BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, and 11 RCTs participants had a mean BMI < 30 kg/m2.
Effects of probiotics:
- Fasting Blood Sugar (FBS): A reduction (−1.42, −0.32 mg/dL, p=0.000)
- Glycated hemaglobin (HbA1c): No reduction (p = 0.000)
- Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR): A decrease (−0.64, −0.31; p = 0.780), regardless of probiotic strain or with a co-supplement
- Insulin: Not significant (p = 0.000). Subgroup analysis: no reduction
- Total Cholesterol (TC): No difference (p = 0.941). Subgroup analysis: reduction from multi-species probiotics (−0.36, −0.01 mg/dL, p = 0.871)
- Triglycerides: Difference (−0.25 mg/dL, p = 0.958)
- LDL-C: No changes (p = 0.189)
- HDL-C: No increase (p = 0.014)
- Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP): A decrease (−6.44, −0.08 mmHg, p = 0.044)
- Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP): A reduction (−4.53, −0.80 mmHg, p = 0.206).
Effects of glucose-lowering drugs:
- FBS: A decrease (−4.22 mg/dL, −1.24 mg/dL, p = 0.000)
- HbA1c: A decrease (−2.51%, −0.52%, p = 0.000) with TZD, GLP-1 RA, SGLT-2i, and DPP- 4i; a reduction with SGLT-2i (p = 0.003)
- TC: No difference (p = 0.000). Subgroup: no decrease with single species probiotics and probiotics with co-supplements, TZD, GLP-1 RA, and DPP-4i)
- TG: No difference (p = 0.000)
- . HDL-C: No increase (p = 0.000). Subgroup: a decrease with TZDs (−2.37, −0.72 mg/dL). No difference with probiotic strains, or probiotics with co-supplements, GLP-1 RA, and DPP-4i
- LDL-C: No changes (p = 0.000), Subgroups: no difference with probiotic strains, probiotics with co-supplements, TZD, GLP-1 RA, and DPP-4i).
Limitations
Limited number of studies for TZD and SGLT-2i, making results potentially unreliable.
Conclusions
Multi species probiotics are worth considering as an adjunct to glucose-lowering drugs, and for improving lipid profiles and hypertension.
Clinical practice applications:
- Probiotic supplementation reduced the HOMA-IR index
- Multi-species probiotics were associated with reduction in TC and TG levels
- DPP-4i only decreased TG levels
- TZD was associated with decrease in HDL-C, whereas probiotic supplementation was associated with higher decrease in SBP and DBP and that GLP-1 RA increases the risk of hypoglycaemia.
Considerations for future research:
- Semaglutide was associated with an increased risk for hypoglycaemia compared with a placebo, indicating that the safety of semaglutide needs further study
- Dietary and physical activity should be considered in future studies
- Heterogeneity in some indicators may be due to differences in study baseline characteristics,Larger trials needed to support the results of this meta-analysis.
Abstract
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of probiotics and glucose-lowering drugs (thiazolidinedione [TZD], glucagon-like pep-tide-1 receptor agonists [GLP-1 RA], dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors, and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors [SGLT-2i]) in patients with type 2 diabetes from randomized con-trolled trials (RCTs). The PubMed, Web of science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched on the treatment effects of probiotics and glucose-lowering drugs on glycemia, lipids, and blood pressure metabolism published between Jan 2015 and April 2021. We performed meta-analyses using the random-effects model. We included 25 RCTs (2,843 participants). Overall, GLP-1RA, SGLT-2i, and TZD significantly reduce fasting blood sugar (FBS) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), whereas GLP-1 RA increased the risk of hypoglycaemia. Multispecies probiotics decrease FBS, total cholesterol (TC), and systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP, DBP). Moreover, subgroup analyses indicated that participants aged >55 years, BMI ≥30 kg/m2, longer duration of intervention, and subjects from Eastern countries, showed significantly higher reduction in FBS and HbA1c, TC, TG and SBP. This meta-analysis revealed that including multiple probiotic rather than glucose-lowering drugs might be more beneficial regarding T2D prevention who suffering from simultaneously hyperglycemia, hypercholesterolemia, and hypertension.
-
7.
Predictors of Symptom-Specific Treatment Response to Dietary Interventions in Irritable Bowel Syndrome.
Colomier, E, Van Oudenhove, L, Tack, J, Böhn, L, Bennet, S, Nybacka, S, Störsrud, S, Öhman, L, Törnblom, H, Simrén, M
Nutrients. 2022;14(2)
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a disorder of gut-brain interaction, formerly known as a functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorder. Apart from abdominal pain, altered stool frequency, diarrhoea, and constipation, a large proportion of patients with IBS also experience other GI symptoms such as abdominal distention, bloating and flatulence. The aim of this study was to investigate predictors of treatment response to the low FODMAP (short-chain carbohydrates, i.e., fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides, and polyols) and the traditional IBS diet while focusing on the four core IBS symptoms (bloating, constipation, diarrhoea, and pain). This study was a post-hoc analysis of a previously published randomised controlled trial. In total, 33 patients on low FODMAP diet and 34 patients on the traditional IBS diet were included in the analysis. Results showed that patterns of psychological, dietary, and microbial factors can predict IBS symptom response to two dietary advice systems—the traditional IBS and the low FODMAP diet. A clinical profile with less severe IBS features appears to predict a better symptom-specific response to both dietary interventions. Authors conclude that larger prospective randomised controlled trials which include different treatment approaches are required as they may help to optimize personalized treatment algorithms in IBS.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- Dietary intervention for IBS related symptoms was efficacious for up to 75% of patients in this study
- Recommendation for a traditional IBS dietary intervention should supersede the low-FODMAP diet, with the latter only implemented when symptoms persist.
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:
Introduction
This randomised controlled intervention study of 67 individuals fulfilling the Rome III criteria for IBS drew comparisons between the efficacy of the traditional IBS diet - as directed by the British Dietetic Association and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) - and the low fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs) diet on specific IBS-related symptoms (pain, constipation, diarrhoea, and bloating).
Methods
A 10-day screening period included faecal sample analysis, 4-day food diary (pre-randomisation and last week of intervention), and daily stool diary (Bristol Stool Form scale). After 10 days, patients compiled several GI and non-GI related questionnaires, inclusive of IBS severity scoring system (IBS-SSS). Patients who scored ≥175 for the IBS-SSS were randomly allocated to follow either a low-FODMAP or traditional IBS diet for a period of 4-weeks. Thorough explanations were provided by trained Dietitians. During intervention, patients compiled symptom questionnaires (Gastrointestinal Symptoms Rating Scale-IBS) on a weekly basis.
Results
- Both diets reduced symptoms of pain, diarrhoea and bloating (all p<0.0001), but not constipation (p=0.15)
- There was no difference between following the traditional IBS diet and low-FODMAP diet in terms of pain (p=0.80), constipation (p=0.63), diarrhoea (p=0.96) and bloating (p=0.35)
- Less severe gut dysbiosis was weakly associated with better dietary response and improvement of constipation (p=0.05)
- Higher energy intake at baseline predicted better pain improvement with both dietary types compared to lower energy intake (p=0.03)
- More severe psychological distress predicted worse intervention response for bloating (p=0.03)
- Higher baseline oligosaccharide intake predicted a worse response to the low FODMAP diet (p=0.01) but not the traditional IBS diet (p=0.16).
Conclusion
This study demonstrated that based on 4 distinct IBS-related symptomatology, better treatment response to 2 different dietary strategies was noted in patients with less severe clinical characteristics. Higher energy intake at baseline and gut dysbiosis scores that were similar to healthy controls were associated with better improvements following dietary interventions. Thus patients who already follow a calorie restricted diet and who have more significant gut dysbiosis profiles might need more bespoke intervention. Severe psychological distress patients responded worse to both diets.
Clinical practice applications:
- Even a short 4-week specific dietary intervention (low FODMAP or traditional IBS diet) can result in IBS-related symptomatic improvement for pain, bloating, and diarrhoea, but not constipation
- The preferred starting point for dietary intervention should be the traditional IBS diet given its relative ease to follow
- The more restrictive low FODMAP protocol could be considered if symptoms persist
- More bespoke interventions are required for patients who suffer with severe psychological stress, have tested and found gut dysbiosis, and individuals who already follow a restrictive diet.
Considerations for future research:
- Future studies need to include not only larger but more diverse cultural and socio-economic cohorts to ascertain the efficacy of IBS symptom-related dietary interventions
- Longer periods of intervention are needed to confirm dietary intervention efficacy.
Abstract
(1) Background: Predictors of dietary treatment response in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) remain understudied. We aimed to investigate predictors of symptom improvement during the low FODMAP and the traditional IBS diet for four weeks. (2) Methods: Baseline measures included faecal Dysbiosis Index, food diaries with daily energy and FODMAP intake, non-gastrointestinal (GI) somatic symptoms, GI-specific anxiety, and psychological distress. Outcomes were bloating, constipation, diarrhea, and pain symptom scores treated as continuous variables in linear mixed models. (3) Results: We included 33 and 34 patients on the low FODMAP and traditional IBS diet, respectively. Less severe dysbiosis and higher energy intake predicted better pain response to both diets. Less severe dysbiosis also predicted better constipation response to both diets. More severe psychological distress predicted worse bloating response to both diets. For the different outcomes, several differential predictors were identified, indicating that baseline factors could predict better improvement in one treatment arm, but worse improvement in the other treatment arm. (4) Conclusions: Psychological, nutritional, and microbial factors predict symptom improvement when following the low FODMAP and traditional IBS diet. Findings may help individualize dietary treatment in IBS.
-
8.
Low FODMAP diet reduces gastrointestinal symptoms in irritable bowel syndrome and clinical response could be predicted by symptom severity: A randomized crossover trial.
Algera, JP, Demir, D, Törnblom, H, Nybacka, S, Simrén, M, Störsrud, S
Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland). 2022;41(12):2792-2800
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common disorder of gut-brain interaction, characterised by chronic abdominal pain and altered bowel habits. Currently, many patients follow an exclusion diet where specific food components are eliminated. One of these exclusion diets is a diet low in fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs). The primary aim of this study was to compare the effects of diets with low vs. moderate FODMAP content on gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms in IBS. This study was a double-blind, randomised, controlled, crossover study which enrolled 31 participants who were randomly assigned to the diet periods. Results showed that the severity of GI symptoms was reduced, and bowel habits were affected in the direction of less frequent and firmer stool by the low FODMAP diet, but not by a diet with moderate amounts of FODMAPs. Authors conclude that assessment of overall IBS severity and predominant bowel habits before the intervention may be helpful for clinicians in their IBS management before considering a trial period with the low FODMAP diet as a treatment option.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
A low (4 g/day) FODMAP diet could provide clinical benefits in the context of an acute strategy for IBS clients with frequent loose stools (IBS-Diarrhoea and/or IBS-Mixed) compared to those with hard and less frequent stools (IBS-Constipation) to improve the severity of GI symptoms, including lower abdominal pain intensity and frequency, bowel habits, daily life interference, and psychological distress.
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:
Introduction
The aim of this paper was to investigate the effects of diets with low vs. moderate FODMAP content on gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and bowel habits, and to identify possible predictors of clinical response to a low FODMAP diet and FODMAP sensitivity in Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS).
Methods
- This study involved a double-blind, randomised, controlled, crossover trial of 29 participants (18-75 years), mostly female, diagnosed with IBS (Rome IV)
- The primary outcome was to assess the effects of a low (4 g/day) vs. moderate (23 g/day) FODMAP diet on GI symptoms over a 7-day period
- Secondary outcomes involved assessing the effects of low vs. moderate FODMAP diets on i) somatic symptoms, ii) psychological distress, iii) predictors of clinical and IBS-Severity Scoring System (IBS-SSS) sensitivity to FODMAP
- Breakfast was standardised, with prescribed low FODMAP list deviations recorded
- Main dishes and snacks were also provided
- Participants were requested to limit alcohol, caffeine, fatty- and spicy foods, ate regularly, chewed thoroughly and drank enough water
- GI symptoms and bowel habits were recorded during the 7-day screening period, then participants undertook a Lactulose Nutrient Challenge Test (LNCT)
- The first 7-day diet started one day after the LNCT
- A 14-day wash-out period allowed participants to eat and drink as usual, thereafter following the second 7-day diet period as part of the cross over design.
Results
A low FODMAP intervention (compared to a moderate FODMAP diet); resulted in:
- Reduced overall IBS rating (10 ± 72 vs. 57 ± 108, P=0.04)
- Improved abdominal pain frequency (10 ± 32 vs. 18 ± 29 (P=0.02)
- Improved stool consistency (0.2 ± 1.0 vs. 0.6 ± 1.2, P= 0.01) and frequency (0.1 ± 0.7 vs. 0.4 ± 0.7, P= 0.01)
- Overall, 34% of participants positively responded to the low FODMAP diet, which could be predicted based on higher baseline IBS-SSS scores (P=0.02)
- Participants sensitive to FODMAPs had increased pre- and postprandial ratings of gas, abdominal pain and bloating and higher exhaled methane concentrations compared to non-sensitive participants to FODMAPs
- Authors highlighted a non-significant association between FODMAP sensitivity and GI symptoms during the LNCT, with higher visceral hypersensitivity (45 ± 20, P=0.73) after ingestion of poorly absorbed and fermentable carbohydrates, with no independent predictors identified.
Conclusions
This study showed that a diet low in FODMAPs reduces GI symptoms and positively impacts bowel habits in IBS, compared with a moderate FODMAP diet.
Clinical practice applications:
- While this was a short term study, a low FODMAP diet reduced GI symptoms and affected bowel habits (more firm and less frequent stools) in IBS, compared with a diet containing moderate amounts of FODMAPs
- Knowing the above, an assessment of overall IBS severity and predominant bowel habits before the intervention may be helpful for clinicians working with younger females in their IBS management before considering a trial period with the low FOD-MAP diet as a treatment option.
Considerations for future research:
- Future trials could target a larger sample size with a more representative population, as well as assessing low FODMAP interventions over longer timeframes
- . Additionally, the assessment of biological measures such as microbiota diversity and stability, as well as metabolites (such as short chain fatty acids) could be important to understand mechanistic attributes of low FODMAP diets in IBS.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides and polyols (FODMAPs) can provoke symptoms in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We aimed to compare the effects of diets with low vs. moderate FODMAP content on gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms and bowel habits, and to identify possible predictors of clinical response to a low FODMAP diet and FODMAP sensitivity in IBS. METHODS Adult participants with IBS (Rome IV criteria, n = 29) were included and adhered to two 7-day diet periods, with either low (4 g/day) or moderate (23 g/day) amounts of FODMAPs, in this randomized, double-blind, crossover study. The periods were separated by a wash-out period (≥14 days). IBS-Severity Scoring System (IBS-SSS) and a stool diary (Bristol Stool Form) were completed before and after the diet periods. At baseline, severity of GI symptoms and gut microbial fermentation were assessed (every 15 min, 4 h) during the Lactulose Nutrient Challenge Test (LNCT). Clinical response and FODMAP sensitivity were defined by reduction after low FODMAP period, and increase after moderate FODMAP period in IBS-SSS (≥50 points), respectively. RESULTS Severity of GI symptoms (P = 0.04), stool consistency (P = 0.01), and stool frequency (P = 0.01) differed between the interventions, with reduced overall GI symptom severity, abdominal pain intensity and frequency, bowel habits dissatisfaction, and daily life interference (P < 0.05 for all), as well as more firm (P = 0.03) and less frequent (P < 0.01) stools after low FODMAP intervention, but not after moderate FODMAP intervention. A third (34%) responded clinically to the low FODMAP diet, and the response could be predicted by higher IBS-SSS at baseline (P = 0.02). Although modest associations between FODMAP sensitivity (22%) and GI symptoms during LNCT were observed, no independent predictors could be identified. CONCLUSIONS A diet low in FODMAPs reduces GI symptoms and affects bowel habits in IBS, compared with a moderate FODMAP diet. Assessment of IBS severity before the intervention may be used to predict clinical response to a low FODMAP diet. Trial registry (http://www. CLINICALTRIALS gov): Registered under Clinical Trial number NCT05182593.
-
9.
A Low-FODMAP Diet Provides Benefits for Functional Gastrointestinal Symptoms but Not for Improving Stool Consistency and Mucosal Inflammation in IBD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Peng, Z, Yi, J, Liu, X
Nutrients. 2022;14(10)
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The low-FODMAP diet eliminates carbohydrates that cannot be easily digested in order to reduce functional gastrointestinal symptoms associated with irritable bowel disease (IBD). The symptoms of irritable bowel disease include abdominal pain and bloating. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate whether a low-FODMAP diet can alleviate functional gastrointestinal symptoms in individuals with inflammatory bowel disease. In comparison with a regular diet, a low-FODMAP diet significantly reduced symptoms of bloating, wind, flatulence, abdominal pain, fatigue, and lethargy in patients with IBD. In addition, patients with Crohn's disease have achieved remission or reduced symptoms after following a low-FODMAP diet. Healthcare professionals can use this study to understand better the effects of a low-FODMAP diet on patients with IBD who have functional gastrointestinal symptoms. Further robust studies are, however, required to evaluate the evidence's robustness and identify the mechanism behind the improvement of symptoms.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- LFD use in IBD improved symptoms of bloating, wind or flatulence, borborygmi, abdominal pain, and fatigue or lethargy, but not nausea and vomiting.
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:
Introduction
This meta-analysis assesses the efficacy of a low fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols diet (LFD) in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD: ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (UC)] participants with functional gastrointestinal symptoms (FGSs).
Methods
A search was performed on PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang (Chinese) Database up to March 2022. Quality assessment of all included studies was performed.
Results
9 studies (4 randomised controlled trials, 5 non-randomised studies) with a total of 351 participants diagnosed with IBD were included, and compared LFD with a placebo diet or normal diet (ND), overall and individual
LFD Effects of FGS:
- Overall 9 studies: an improvement (0.47, 0.33–0.66, p = 0.0000)
- No difference in the subgroup classified by disease type
- CD and UC: no improvement
Individual improvement:
- Bloating (0.37, 0,24-0,57, p=0.0000); wind or flatulence (0.38, 0,28-0,51, p=0.0000); borborygmi (0.48, 0,26-0,89, p=0.0000), abdominal pain (0.5, 0,37-0,68, p=0.0000), fatigue/lethargy (0.71, 0,61-0,82, p=0.0000)
- No difference in nausea and vomiting (0.54, 0,22-1,32, p=018)
IBS Quality of Life Score:
- 2 studies: reduced Short IBD Questionnaire (SIBDQ) score (11.24, 6.61-15.87, p=0.0000)
Bristol Stool Form Chart:
- 2 studies: normal stool consistency (type 3-4); no difference (5.99, 0.17-216.51, p=0.33)
- 2 other studies: no difference (-0.17, 0.48 - 0.15, p=0.30)
Diseases activity (Harvey-Bradshaw index):
- 2 studies using the Mayo score: no difference (-32, -1,09-0.45, p=0.41)
- 3 studies using BHi score: reduction (-1.09, -1,77-0.42, p=0.002)
Faecal calprotectin:
- 2 studies: no change (-16.03, -36,78-4.73, p=0.13)
Limitations
- Comparison diets were not standardised, suggesting the potential of different dietary habits to bias results..
- Heterogeneity of included studies, and the relatively small sample size of the studies can reduce the reliability of the results.
Conclusion
While the study found inconsistent definition standards for FGS, all the nine studies showed that LFD was associated with an improvement in some symptoms.
Clinical practice applications:
- This study suggests that IBD patients with FGSs may benefit from LFD treatment with the assistance of a healthcare professional.
Considerations for future research:
- This study has shown that LFD can improve FGSs in IBD, but further research with a larger sample size and more comprehensive analysis is warranted to replicate the results.
- The description of the findings and Quality of Life data are a little unclear. The impact on Quality of Life warrants further investigation, as clinicians need to consider the impact of following a restrictive diet on Quality of Life.
Abstract
BACKGROUND A low fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols diet (LFD) is claimed to improve functional gastrointestinal symptoms (FGSs). However, the role of LFD in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients with FGSs remains unclear. OBJECTIVE To systematically assess the efficacy of LFD in IBD patients with FGSs. METHODS Six databases were searched from inception to 1 January 2022. Data were synthesized as the relative risk of symptoms improvement and normal stool consistency, mean difference of Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS), Short IBD Questionnaire (SIBDQ), IBS Quality of Life (IBS-QoL), Harvey-Bradshaw index (HBi), Mayo score, and fecal calprotectin (FC). Risk of bias was assessed based on study types. A funnel plot and Egger's test were used to analyze publication bias. RESULTS This review screened and included nine eligible studies, including four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and five before-after studies, involving a total of 446 participants (351 patients with LFD vs. 95 controls). LFD alleviated overall FGSs (RR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.33-0.66, p = 0.0000) and obtained higher SIBDQ scores (MD = 11.24, 95% CI 6.61 to 15.87, p = 0.0000) and lower HBi score of Crohn's disease (MD = -1.09, 95% CI -1.77 to -0.42, p = 0.002). However, there were no statistically significant differences in normal stool consistency, BSFS, IBS-QoL, Mayo score of ulcerative colitis, and FC. No publication bias was found. CONCLUSIONS LFD provides a benefit in FGSs and QoL but not for improving stool consistency and mucosal inflammation in IBD patients. Further well-designed RCTs are needed to develop the optimal LFD strategy for IBD.
-
10.
The vaginal microbiome and the risk of preterm birth: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Gudnadottir, U, Debelius, JW, Du, J, Hugerth, LW, Danielsson, H, Schuppe-Koistinen, I, Fransson, E, Brusselaers, N
Scientific reports. 2022;12(1):7926
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Preterm birth is a major cause of neonatal mortality and morbidity. Many factors can trigger premature labour onset, including preterm premature rupture of membranes, infections and microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity. The vaginal microbiome is thought to protect from such infections. The aim of this study was to assess the association between the vaginal microbiome and the risk of preterm birth. This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of 17 cohort studies. The number of pregnancies per study ranged between 38 and 539, with 8 and 107 preterm births. Results show that women with a “low-lactobacilli” vaginal microbiome composition were at higher risk of preterm birth (spontaneous and overall) compared to women with L. crispatus (microbiome) dominant microbiome compositions. Authors conclude that the diversity of the vaginal microbiome seems to play a part in the risk of preterm birth.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- The diversity of the vaginal microbiome is reported to play a part in the risk of preterm births.
- Practitioners could consider testing the virginal microbiome for low Lactobacilli or the dominance of Gardnerella and Prevotella and then recommending a probiotic supplement to pregnant patients who have low Lactobacilli vaginal microbiome.
Evidence Category:
-
A: Meta-analyses, position-stands, randomized-controlled trials (RCTs)
-
X
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:
Introduction
A systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the association between vaginal microbiome and risk of preterm births.
Methodology
- Seventeen longitudinal cohort studies were included. Seven originated from North America, three from Europe, two from South America, three from Asia, and two from Africa. The number of pregnancies per study ranged between 38 and 539, with 8 and 107 preterm births. 16S Sequencing techniques were used to identify the microbial species. Preterm birth was defined as birth before 37 weeks of gestation.
- Microbiome community state types (CSTs) were grouped into five categories based on dominating species: L. crispatus, L. gasseri, L. iners,“low-lactobacilli” and L. jensenii. “Low-lactobacilli” was defined as an increased diversity of anaerobic or mixture of aerobe and facultative anaerobe bacteria (such as Gardnerella and Prevotella) based on the cut-offs and categorization used in the individual studies.
Results
Primary clinical outcomes were:
- Among women who delivered preterm, the pooled proportion with “low-lactobacilli” was 0.41 (95% CI 0.30-0.53) compared to 0.29 (95% CI 0.20-0.38) of women with full-term deliveries.
- The risk of preterm births was higher among women with “low-lactobacilli” compared to L. crispatus (OR 1.69, 95%CI 1.15 -2.49).”Low-lactobacilli” included Garnerella and Provotella, both of which are known to promote inflammatory cytokines and are commonly found in vaginal microbiome just before preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM).
Clinical practice applications:
- The diversity of the vaginal microbiome is reported to play an important role in the risk of preterm births.
- Women with low Lactobacilli seem to be at a greater risk of delivering preterm compared to women with L. crispatus dominant microbiome.
- Based on this study, practitioners could therefore consider testing the vaginal microbiome of their patients for low Lactobacilli and/or the dominance of Gardnerella and Prevotella.
- Practitioners may also consider recommending specific probiotic supplementation during pregnancy to increase the dominance of Lactobacilli and L. crispatus vaginal microbiome.
Considerations for future research:
- In the past, researchers have grouped the microbiome into categories based on dominating species, which is not ideal. Therefore, further studies are needed where individual microbiome sequencing data is used to make comparisons.
- Additionally, longitudinal studies are needed with higher sample sizes to investigate the natural changes of the vaginal microbiome during pregnancy and the physiological mechanisms underlying these apparent different risk profiles.
- Furthermore, randomized-controlled trials are needed to establish if pregnant women could benefit from specific probiotic supplementation during pregnancy.
Abstract
Preterm birth is a major cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Increasing evidence links the vaginal microbiome to the risk of spontaneous preterm labour that leads to preterm birth. The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to investigate the association between the vaginal microbiome, defined as community state types (CSTs, i.e. dominance of specific lactobacilli spp, or not (low-lactobacilli)), and the risk of preterm birth. Systematic review using PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane library was performed. Longitudinal studies using culture-independent methods categorizing the vaginal microbiome in at least three different CSTs to assess the risk of preterm birth were included. A (network) meta-analysis was conducted, presenting pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI); and weighted proportions and 95% CI. All 17 studies were published between 2014 and 2021 and included 38-539 pregnancies and 8-107 preterm births. Women presenting with "low-lactobacilli" vaginal microbiome were at increased risk (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.15-2.49) for delivering preterm compared to Lactobacillus crispatus dominant women. Our network meta-analysis supports the microbiome being predictive of preterm birth, where low abundance of lactobacilli is associated with the highest risk, and L. crispatus dominance the lowest.