-
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.
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.
-
3.
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.
-
4.
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.
-
5.
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.
-
6.
The anxiolytic effect of probiotics: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical and preclinical literature.
Reis, DJ, Ilardi, SS, Punt, SEW
PloS one. 2018;13(6):e0199041
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The microbiome-gut-brain axis in general and the possibility of altering the microbiome through administration of probiotics to support physical and mental health has received much attention in recent years. Here, a systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out to evaluate the clinical and preclinical evidence for the use of probiotics in anxiety. 22 preclinical (rodent) studies were included in the meta-analysis and showed an overall significant anxiolytic effect of probiotics in diseased, but not healthy, animals. Studies were heterogenous with regards to species and strains of probiotic used. Subgroup analysis showed that only Lactobacillus rhamnosus significantly reduced anxiety-like behaviour. 14 human studies were included in the meta-analysis and overall no anxiolytic effect was observed. Only three out of the 14 studies showed a positive effect (vs 12 out of the 22 animal studies), one of which used L. rhamnosus. Due to the small number of trials no subgroup analysis could be performed. Apart from the small number and heterogeneity of human studies, the authors discuss further possible reasons for the discrepancy between animal and human studies: • Dose: Dosages were typically 100 times higher (per kg) in animals than in humans. • Diseased vs healthy subjects: In animal studies, only those which investigated animals displaying anxiety related behaviour improved with probiotic administration. None of the human studies specifically recruited anxious individuals, eight of the studies included healthy subjects, the other six selected participants for other disorders, including four for irritable bowel syndrome. The authors conclude that more research into an anxiolytic effect of probiotics in humans is warranted, especially using L. rhamnosus, studying patients with anxiety, and using higher dosages and longer study duration.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- While preclinical animal studies suggest that probiotics may help reduce anxiety, such findings have not yet translated to clinical research in humans.
- Further investigation of probiotic treatment for clinically relevant anxiety is warranted, particularly with respect to the probiotic species L. rhamnosus.
Evidence Category:
-
X
A: Meta-analyses, position-stands, randomized-controlled trials (RCTs)
-
B: Systematic reviews including RCTs of limited number
-
C: Non-randomized trials, observational studies, narrative reviews
-
D: Case-reports, evidence-based clinical findings
-
E: Opinion piece, other
Summary Review:
This review highlights how important it is for future studies to focus on clinically anxious patients and also to consider exploring the effects of differing doses of probiotics in this population.
Clinical practice applications:
Anxiety disorders affect as many as 3 in 10 people at some point during their lifetime. On that basis, it would be great to have a viable non-pharmaceutical option to help with some of the symptoms.
Considerations for future research:
If the results from the pre-clinical studies can be corroborated in human populations, this could have widespread clinical implications.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Probiotics have generated intensive research interest in recent years as a novel mode of treatment for physical and mental illness. Nevertheless, the anxiolytic potential of probiotics remains unclear. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical and preclinical (animal model) evidence regarding the effect of probiotic administration on anxiety. METHODS The PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science databases were reviewed for preclinical and clinical studies that met the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The effects of probiotics on anxiety-like behavior and symptoms of anxiety were analyzed by meta-analyses. Separate subgroup analyses were conducted on diseased versus healthy animals, specific preclinical probiotic species, and clinical versus healthy human samples. RESULTS Data were extracted from 22 preclinical studies (743 animals) and 14 clinical studies (1527 individuals). Overall, probiotics reduced anxiety-like behavior in animals (Hedges' g = -0.47, 95% CI -0.77 --0.16, p = 0.004). Subgroup analyses revealed a significant reduction only among diseased animals. Probiotic species-level analyses identified only Lactobacillus (L.) rhamnosus as an anxiolytic species, but these analyses were broadly under-powered. Probiotics did not significantly reduce symptoms of anxiety in humans (Hedges' g = -0.12, 95% CI -0.29-0.05, p = 0.151), and did not differentially affect clinical and healthy human samples. CONCLUSIONS While preclinical (animal) studies suggest that probiotics may help reduce anxiety, such findings have not yet translated to clinical research in humans, perhaps due to the dearth of extant research with clinically anxious populations. Further investigation of probiotic treatment for clinically relevant anxiety is warranted, particularly with respect to the probiotic species L. rhamnosus.