Effect of synbiotic therapy on the incidence of ventilator associated pneumonia in critically ill patients: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Rebound Inverts the Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia Prevention Effect of Antibiotic Based Decontamination Interventions in ICU Cohorts with Prolonged Length of Stay

Could rebound explain the paradoxical lack of prevention effect against Staphylococcus aureus blood stream infections (BSIs) with antibiotic-based decontamination intervention (BDI) methods among studies of ICU patients within the literature? Two meta-regression models were applied, each versus the group mean length of stay (LOS). Firstly, the prevention effects against S. aureus BSI [and S. aureus VAP] among 136 studies of antibiotic-BDI versus other interventions were analyzed. Secondly, the S. aureus BSI [and S. aureus VAP] incidence in 268 control and intervention cohorts from studies of antibiotic-BDI versus that among 165 observational cohorts as a benchmark was modelled. In model one, the meta-regression line versus group mean LOS crossed the null, with the antibiotic-BDI prevention effect against S. aureus BSI at mean LOS day 7 (OR 0.45; 0.30 to 0.68) inverted at mean LOS day 20 (OR 1.7; 1.1 to 2.6). In model two, the meta-regression line versus group mean LOS crossed the benchmark line, and the predicted S. aureus BSI incidence for antibiotic-BDI groups was 0.47; 0.09-0.84 percentage points below versus 3.0; 0.12-5.9 above the benchmark in studies with 7 versus 20 days mean LOS, respectively. Rebound within the intervention groups attenuated and inverted the prevention effect of antibiotic-BDI against S. aureus VAP and BSI, respectively. This explains the paradoxical findings.

Efficacy of probiotics or synbiotics in critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This latest systematic review and meta-analysis aim to examine the effects of probiotic and synbiotic supplementation in critically ill patients.

METHODS

Relevant articles were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Database, and the Web of Science. The primary output measure was the incident of ventilator-associated pneumonia, and the secondary outputs were diarrhea, Clostridium diffusion infection (CDI), incident of sepsis, incident of hospital acquired pneumonia, duration of mechanical exploitation, ICU mortality rate, length of ICU stay, in hospital mortality, and length of hospital stay. Data were pooled and expressed as Relative Risk(RR) and Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) with a 95 % confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

33 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis, with 4065 patients who received probiotics or synbiotics (treatment group) and 3821 patients who received standard care or placebo (control group). The pooled data from all included studies demonstrated that the treatment group has significantly reduced incidence of ventilation-associated pneumonia (VAP) (RR = 0.80; 95 % CI: 0.67-0.96; p = 0.021, I2 = 52.5 %) and sepsis (RR = 0.97; 95 % CI: 0.66-1.42; p = 0.032, I2 = 54.4 %), As well as significantly increased duration of mechanical exploitation (SMD = -0.47; 95 % CI: -0.74-0.20, p = 0.012, I2 = 63.4 %), ICU mobility (RR = 0.95; 95 % CI: 0.71-1.27; p = 0.004, I2 = 62.8 %), length of ICU stay (SMD = -0.29; 95 % CI: -0.58-0.01; p = 0.000, I2 = 82.3 %) and length of hospital stay (SMD = -0.33; 95 % CI: -0.57-0.08, p = 0.000, I2 = 74.2 %) than the control group. There were no significant differences in diarrhea, CDI, incidence of hospital acquired pneumonia, and in hospital mortality between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis showed that probiotic and synbiotic supplements are beneficial for critically ill patients as they significantly reduce the incidence of ventilator associated pneumonia and sepsis, as well as the duration of mechanical exploitation, length of hospital stay, length of ICU stay, and ICU mortality. However, this intervention has minimal impact on diarrhea, CDI, incidence of hospital acquired pneumonia, and in hospital mortality in critically ill patients.

Association of early dietary fiber intake and mortality in septic patients with mechanical ventilation based on MIMIC IV 2.1 database: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Whether early dietary fiber intake in septic patients is associated with a better clinical prognosis remains unclear, especially the time and the amount. Therefore, we assessed the association between early dietary fiber intake and clinical outcomes in septic patients by examining an extensive database.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the MIMIC IV 2.1 database, focusing on consecutive septic patients requiring mechanical ventilation in medical or mixed medical-surgical ICUs. We collected patient demographics and nutritional data. Dietary fiber amounts were calculated according to enteral nutrition instructions from manufacturers within the first 72 h after admission. After adjusting for covariates, we employed restricted cubic spline (RCS) regression to investigate the relationship between fiber intake (FI) and 28-day mortality. Patients were categorized into three groups based on their fiber index (FI) within 72 h of admission: low fiber index (LFI) group when FI was < 3 g/(%), medium fiber index (MFI) group when FI ranged from 3 to 35 g(%), and high fiber index (HFI) group when FI ≥ 35 g(%). Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models were utilized to assess the association between early FI and 28-day mortality. We ultimately employed Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves and log-rank test visually represent the association between FI and 90-day mortality. The second outcomes include ICU-acquired infections and the hospital and ICU death, length of hospital and ICU stay, and length of mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

Among 1057 subjects, 562 (53.2%) were male, with a median age of 64.8 years (IQR 53.4-75.2). We observed a J-shaped relationship between FI and 28-day mortality. The MFI group exhibited the lowest 28-day mortality [adjusted HR 0.64 (0.45-0.91), p = 0.013] and the lowest rate of hospital mortality [adjusted OR 0.60 (0.39-0.93), p = 0.022], with no statistically significant differences noted in the HFI group when compared to the LFI group. Similar patterns were observed for 60-day and 90-day mortality. However, no statistically significant differences were observed in other secondary outcomes after adjusting for covariates.

CONCLUSION

Early medium fiber index intake improved 28-day mortality and lower hospital mortality in septic M/SICU patients on mechanical ventilation.

Study on Effects of Probiotics on Gut Microbiome and Clinical Course in Patients with Critical Care Illnesses

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a nosocomial infection contracted by ventilator patients in which bacteria colonize the upper digestive tract and contaminated secretions are released into the lower airway. This nosocomial infection increases the morbidity and mortality of the patients as well as the cost of treatment. Probiotic formulations have recently been proposed to prevent the colonization of these pathogenic bacteria. In this prospective observational study, we aimed to investigate the effects of probiotics on gut microbiota and their relation to clinical outcomes in mechanically ventilated patients. For this study, 35 patients were recruited (22 probiotic-treated and 13 without probiotic treatment) from a cohort of 169 patients. Patients in the probiotic group were given a dose of 6 capsules of a commercially available probiotic (VSL#3®:112.5 billion CFU/cap) in three divided doses for 10 days. Sampling was carried out after each dose to monitor the temporal change in the gut microbiota composition. To profile the microbiota, we used a 16S rRNA metagenomic approach, and differences among the groups were computed using multivariate statistical analyses. Differences in gut microbial diversity (Bray Curtis and Jaccard distance, p-value > 0.05) between the probiotic-treated group and the control group were not observed. Furthermore, treatment with probiotics resulted in the enrichment of Lactobacillus and Streptococcus in the gut microbiota of the probiotic-treated groups. Our results demonstrated that probiotics might lead to favorable alterations in gut microbiome characteristics. Future studies should focus on the appropriate dosages and frequency of probiotics, which can lead to improved clinical outcomes.

Clinical efficacy of probiotics in prevention of infectious diseases among hospitalized patients in ICU and non-ICU wards in clinical randomized trials: A systematic review

Background and Aims

The present study aimed to review probiotics' clinical efficacy in preventing infectious diseases among hospitalized patients in ICU and non-ICU wards.

Methods

A search of Medline, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Open Grey, and Google Scholar was conducted for eligible publications from 2002 to 2020 following the requirements outlined in the PRISMA guideline. The search strategy was based on the combination of the following terms: "probiotics," "prebiotics," "synbiotics," and "cross-infection." The logical operators "AND" (or the equivalent operator for the databases) and "OR" (e.g., probiotics OR prebiotics OR synbiotics) were used.

Results

The results indicated that the probiotic consumption caused a significant reduction in antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) in 2/8 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating AAD/CDI. Also, 5/12 clinical trials highlighted the considerable effects of probiotics on the reduction or prevention of ventilator associated pneumoniae (VAP), so the mean prevalence of VAP was lower in the probiotic group than in the placebo group. The total rate of nosocomial infections among preterm infants was nonsignificantly higher in the probiotic group compared to the control group.

Conclusion

This systematic review shows that the administration of probiotics has moderate preventive or mitigating effects on the occurrence of VAP in ICU patients, CDI, AAD, and nosocomial infections among children. Consequently, applying antibiotics along with the proper probiotic species can be advantageous.

Investigating the effect of oral synbiotic on enteral feeding tolerance in critically ill patients: A double-blinded controlled clinical trial of gut microbiota

BACKGROUND

Probiotics are beneficial live microorganisms that can modify the gut microbiota. It is assumed that they help improve enteral feeding intolerance (EFI) and nosocomial infections in critically ill patients. The present clinical trial aimed to investigate the efficacy of synbiotics in improving EFI and oropharyngeal aspiration in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

This randomized clinical trial was conducted on 105 critically ill patients admitted to the ICU of a tertiary referral hospital affiliated with a medical university. The patients were randomly assigned to either a synbiotic or control group and underwent 7 days of investigation. The primary end point was reduced gastric residual volume, which is suggestive of an improvement in EFI. The secondary end point included requirement for prokinetics, frequency of aspiration, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, and level of consciousness.

RESULTS

The present clinical trial showed that synbiotic intervention has resulted in a significantly diminished requirement for prokinetics (P = 0.019), fewer oropharyngeal aspirations (P = 0.01), improved volume of bolus administration, and decreased gastric residual volume during the 7-day follow-up period. The patients who received synbiotic had an improved level of consciousness (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This clinical trial showed that the prescription of synbiotic from the initial days of enteral feeding has resulted in a significantly diminished requirement for prokinetics, less oropharyngeal aspiration, decreased gastric residual volume, improved volume of bolus administration, and hence, better tolerance of enteral feeding.

Benefits and harm of probiotics and synbiotics in adult critically ill patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials concluded that probiotics administration in critically ill patients was safe and associated with reduced rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia and diarrhea. However, a recent large multicenter trial found probiotics administration, compared to placebo, was not efficacious and increased adverse events. An updated meta-analysis that controls for type-1 and -2 errors using trial sequential analysis, with a detailed account of adverse events associated with probiotic administration, is warranted to confirm the safety and efficacy of probiotic use in critically ill patients.

METHODS

RCTs that compared probiotics or synbiotics to usual care or placebo and reported clinical and diarrheal outcomes were searched in 4 electronic databases from inception to March 8, 2022 without language restriction. Four reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the study qualities using the Critical Care Nutrition (CCN) Methodological Quality Scoring System. Random-effect meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were used to synthesize the results. The primary outcome was ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). The main subgroup analysis compared the effects of higher versus lower quality studies (based on median CCN score).

RESULTS

Seventy-five studies with 71 unique trials (n = 8551) were included. In the overall analysis, probiotics significantly reduced VAP incidence (risk ratio [RR] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.88; I² = 65%; 16 studies). However, such benefits were demonstrated only in lower (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32, 0.69; I² = 44%; 7 studies) but not higher quality studies (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73, 1.08; I² = 43%; 9 studies), with significant test for subgroup differences (p = 0.004). Additionally, TSA showed that the VAP benefits of probiotics in the overall and subgroup analyses were type-1 errors. In higher quality trials, TSA found that future trials are unlikely to demonstrate any benefits of probiotics on infectious complications and diarrhea. Probiotics had higher adverse events than control (pooled risk difference: 0.01, 95% CI 0.01, 0.02; I² = 0%; 22 studies).

CONCLUSION

High-quality RCTs did not support a beneficial effect of probiotics on clinical or diarrheal outcomes in critically ill patients. Given the lack of benefits and the increased incidence of adverse events, probiotics should not be routinely administered to critically ill patients.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42022302278.

The safety and efficacy of probiotic supplementation for critically ill adult patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

CONTEXT

The safety and efficacy of probiotics during severe illness has been a subject of ongoing interest. The impact of probiotics can worsen nutritional status, which could potentially result in a deterioration of the patient's overall life-threatening status.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of probiotics in reducing intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired infections in adult critically ill patients.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and Cochrane library databases for the period 2011-2020 were searched.

DATA EXTRACTION

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) methodology was used to search for randomized controlled trials that evaluated the use of probiotics among critically ill patients.

DATA ANALYSIS

No significant difference was observed between probiotics and control groups in terms of the mortality rate (risk ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval .82 to 1.55, P = .46). Probiotics, however, provided a significant reduction in ICU-acquired infections (risk ratio .73, 95% confidence interval .58 to .93, P = .01).

CONCLUSION

The use of probiotics seems to play a role in decreasing the incidence of ICU-acquired infections. Also, a potential reduction in terms of the incidence of diarrhea has been reported, with no examples of adverse incidents, suggesting probiotics are safe.

Probiotics in Critical Illness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES

To determine the safety and efficacy of probiotics or synbiotics on morbidity and mortality in critically ill adults and children.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and unpublished sources from inception to May 4, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

We performed a systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared enteral probiotics or synbiotics to placebo or no treatment in critically ill patients. We screened studies independently and in duplicate.

DATA EXTRACTION

Independent reviewers extracted data in duplicate. A random-effects model was used to pool data. We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using the Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Sixty-five RCTs enrolled 8,483 patients. Probiotics may reduce ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) (relative risk [RR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.89 and risk difference [RD], 6.9% reduction; 95% CI, 2.7-10.2% fewer; low certainty), healthcare-associated pneumonia (HAP) (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55-0.89; RD, 5.5% reduction; 95% CI, 8.2-2.0% fewer; low certainty), ICU length of stay (LOS) (mean difference [MD], 1.38 days fewer; 95% CI, 0.57-2.19 d fewer; low certainty), hospital LOS (MD, 2.21 d fewer; 95% CI, 1.18-3.24 d fewer; low certainty), and duration of invasive mechanical ventilation (MD, 2.53 d fewer; 95% CI, 1.31-3.74 d fewer; low certainty). Probiotics probably have no effect on mortality (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.87-1.04 and RD, 1.1% reduction; 95% CI, 2.8% reduction to 0.8% increase; moderate certainty). Post hoc sensitivity analyses without high risk of bias studies negated the effect of probiotics on VAP, HAP, and hospital LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Low certainty RCT evidence suggests that probiotics or synbiotics during critical illness may reduce VAP, HAP, ICU and hospital LOS but probably have no effect on mortality.

Probiotic Supplementation Prevents the Development of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia for Mechanically Ventilated ICU Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is one of the common critical complications of nosocomial infection (NI) in invasive mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The efficacy of total parenteral nutrition (TPN), enteral nutrition and/or adjuvant peripheral parenteral nutrition (EPN) supplemented with or without probiotic, prebiotic, and synbiotic therapies in preventing VAP among these patients has been questioned. We aimed to systematically and comprehensively summarize all available studies to generate the best evidence of VAP prevention for invasive mechanically ventilated ICU patients.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the administration of TPN, EPN, probiotics-supplemented EPN, prebiotics-supplemented EPN, and synbiotics-supplemented EPN for VAP prevention in invasive mechanically ventilated ICU patients were systematically retrieved from four electronic databases. The incidence of VAP was the primary outcome and was determined by the random-effects model of a Bayesian framework. The secondary outcomes were NI, ICU and hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay, and mechanical ventilation duration. The registration number of Prospero is CRD42020195773.

Results

A total of 8339 patients from 31 RCTs were finally included in network meta-analysis. The primary outcome showed that probiotic-supplemented EPN had a higher correlation with the alleviation of VAP than EPN in critically invasive mechanically ventilated patients (odds ratio [OR] 0.75; 95% credible intervals [CrI] 0.58–0.95). Subgroup analyses showed that probiotic-supplemented EPN prevented VAP in trauma patients (OR 0.30; 95% CrI 0.13–0.83), mixed probiotic strain therapy was more effective in preventing VAP than EPN therapy (OR 0.55; 95% CrI 0.31–0.97), and low-dose probiotic therapy (less than 10¹⁰ CFU per day) was more associated with lowered incidence of VAP than EPN therapy (OR 0.16; 95% CrI 0.04–0.64). Secondary outcomes indicated that synbiotic-supplemented EPN therapy was more significantly related to decreased incidence of NI than EPN therapy (OR 0.34; 95% CrI 0.11–0.85). Prebiotic-supplemented EPN administration was the most effective in preventing diarrhea (OR 0.05; 95% CrI 0.00–0.71).

Conclusion

Probiotic supplementation shows promise in reducing the incidence of VAP in critically invasive mechanically ventilated patients. Currently, low quality of evidence reduces strong clinical recommendations. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to conclusively prove these findings.

Systamatic Review Registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020195773], identifier [CRD42020195773].

Pro-, pre- and synbiotics for the prevention of incidental ventilator-associated pneumonia among critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the preventive effects of pro-, pre- and synbiotics on ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) among critically ill patients.

METHODS

The PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for relevant articles written before 19 February 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical efficacy of pro-, pre- and synbiotics with placebos or standard treatments for the prevention of incidental VAP were included.

RESULTS

A total of 15 RCTs were included. Patients receiving pro-, pre- and synbiotics had a lower risk than the control group of contracting VAP (risk ratio [RR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57-0.85; I² = 67%). The duration of mechanical ventilation was significantly shorter in the study group than in the control group (mean difference [MD], -1.61 days; 95% CI, -2.72 to -0.50; I² = 86%), and the study group had a shorter duration of stay in the intensive care unit than the control group did (MD, -1.72 days; 95% CI, -3.22 to -0.23; I² = 87%).

CONCLUSIONS

Pro-, pre- and synbiotics can prevent VAP and the use of probiotics for patients who are critically ill should be supported.

Probiotic in the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients: evidence from meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Probiotic might have a role in the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) among mechanically ventilated patients, but the efficacy and safety remained inconsistent. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of probiotic (prebiotic, synbiotic) versus placebo in preventing VAP in critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library databases were searched to 10 October 2021 without language restriction for randomized or semi-randomized controlled trials evaluating probiotic (prebiotic, synbiotic) vs. placebo in prevention of VAP in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. The pooled relative risk (RR) along with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were combined using a random-effects model. Furthermore, the trial sequential analysis (TSA) and subgroup analyses were performed. Statistical significance was regarded as P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Twenty-three trials involving 5543 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis. The combined RR of decreasing the risk of VAP by probiotic was 0.67 (0.56, 0.81) for all eligible studies, 0.69 (n = 5136; 95% CI = 0.57 to 0.84; P < 0.01) for adults studies and 0.55 (n = 407; 95%CI = 0.31 to 0.99; P = 0.046) for neonates/children studies. Additionally, the above-mentioned positive finding in 20 adults studies was verified by the results of TSA, subgroup analyses and cumulative meta-analysis. Ample evidences demonstrated a 31% decrease in RR of incidence of VAP was noted when prophylactic probiotic therapy was administrated among adult patients. Finally, there were no effects on the ICU/hospital/28-/90-day mortality, bacteremia, CRBSI, diarrhea, ICU-acquired infections, infectious complications, pneumonia, UTI and wound infection between two groups (P > 0.05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of our study, the current evidences suggested that prophylactic administration of probiotic might be utilized as a preventive method for VAP in neonates/children and adults patients who required mechanical ventilation. However, further large, high-quality RCTs are warranted to assess the efficacy and safety of probiotic treatment in critically ill patients, especially for the neonates/children studies and the long-term consequences of this therapy.

Probiotics for the Prevention of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Background: Presently, there is conflicting evidence regarding the efficacy of probiotics in the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). This meta-analysis was conducted to update current clinical evidence and evaluate the efficacy and safety of probiotics for the prevention of VAP. Methods: We searched three databases and two trial registers to retrieve randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics or synbiotics with placebo or standard treatment for the prevention of VAP in adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU). Results: Our meta-analysis included 18 RCTs involving 4893 patients. Our results showed that probiotics may reduce the incidence of VAP (RR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.55–0.84; low certainty). However, in our subgroup and sensitivity analyses, the effect was not significant in double-blind studies, and in studies with a low risk of bias in the randomisation process. Probiotics reduced the length of ICU stay (MD −2.22 days, 95% CI: −4.17 to −0.28; moderate certainty) and the duration of antibiotic use (MD −1.25 days, 95% CI −1.86 to −0.64; moderate certainty). Conclusions: Probiotics may reduce the incidence of VAP but due to the low quality of pooled evidence, the use of probiotics warrants caution. Further, large-scale, high-quality RCTs need to be conducted to provide conclusive evidence.

Efficacy of probiotics or synbiotics for critically ill adult patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Microbial dysbiosis in critically ill patients is a leading cause of mortality and septic complications. Probiotics and synbiotics have emerged as novel therapy on gut microbiota to prevent septic complications. However, current evidence on their effects is conflicting. This work aims to systematically review the impact of probiotics or synbiotics in critically ill adult patients.

Methods

A comprehensive search of the PubMed, CBM, Embase, CENTRAL, ISI, and CNKI databases was performed to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluate probiotics or synbiotics in critically ill patients. The quality assessment was based on the modified Jadad's score scale and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1. The major outcome measure was mortality. Secondary outcomes included incidence of septic complications, sepsis incidence, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, incidence of non-septic complication, and ventilator day. Data synthesis was conduct by Review Manager 5.4.

Results

A total of 25 randomized controlled trials reporting on 5049 critically ill patients were included. In the intervention group, 2520 participants received probiotics or synbiotics, whereas 2529 participants received standard care or placebo. Pooling data from randomized controlled trials demonstrated a significant reduction in the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in the treatment group [(risk ratio (RR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78–0.95; p < 0.003, I² = 85%)]. However, in the subgroup analysis, the reduction of incidence of VAP was only significant in patients receiving synbiotics (RR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.47–0.80, p = 0.0004, I² = 40%) and not significant in those receiving only probiotics (RR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.82–1.01, p = 0.07, I² = 65%). Moreover, sepsis incidence of critically ill patients was only significantly reduced by the addition of synbiotics (RR = 0.41; 95% CI: 0.22–0.72, p = 0.005, I² = 0%). The incidence of ICU-acquired infections was significantly reduced by the synbiotics therapy (RR = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.58–0.89, p = 0.0007, I² = 79%). There was no significant difference in mortality, diarrhea, or length of ICU stay between the treatment and control groups.

Conclusions

Synbiotics is an effective and safe nutrition therapy in reducing septic complications in critically ill patients. However, in such patients, administration of probiotics alone compared with placebo resulted in no difference in the septic complications.

Clinical Benefits From Administering Probiotics to Mechanical Ventilated Patients in Intensive Care Unit: A PRISMA-Guided Meta-Analysis

Background

The use of probiotics has been considered as a new intervention for ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) prevention in the intensive care unit (ICU). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of probiotics on mechanical-ventilated patients in ICU.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from their respective inception through October 10, 2021. All studies meeting the inclusion criteria were selected to evaluate the effect of probiotics on patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU.

Results

A total of 15 studies involving 4,693 participants met our inclusion criterion and were included in this meta-analysis. The incidence of VAP in the probiotic group was significantly lower (odds ratio [OR] 0.58, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.81; p = 0.002; I² = 71%). However, a publication bias may be present as the test of asymmetry was significant (p = 0.007). The probiotic administration was associated with a significant reduction in the duration of mechanical ventilation (mean difference [MD] −1.57, 95% CI −3.12 to −0.03; p = 0.05; inconsistency [I]² = 80%), length of ICU stay (MD −1.87, 95% CI −3.45 to −0.28; p = 0.02; I² = 76%), and incidence of bacterial colonization (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.78; p = 0.0001; I² = 34%). Moreover, no statistically significant differences were observed regarding the incidence of diarrhea (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.25; p = 0.54; I² = 12%) and mortality (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05; p = 0.19; I² = 0%) between probiotics group and control group.

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis shows that probiotics are associated with a reduction in VAP, as well as the duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, and bacterial colonization, but no significant effects on ICU mortality and occurrence of diarrhea. However, in consideration of the significant heterogeneity and publication bias, our findings need to be further validated.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42020150770.

The role of the microbiota in the management of intensive care patients

The composition of the gut microbiota is highly dynamic and changes according to various conditions. The gut microbiota mainly includes difficult-to-cultivate anaerobic bacteria, hence knowledge about its composition has significantly arisen from culture-independent methods based on next-generation sequencing (NGS) such as 16S profiling and shotgun metagenomics. The gut microbiota of patients hospitalized in intensive care units (ICU) undergoes many alterations because of critical illness, antibiotics, and other ICU-specific medications. It is then characterized by lower richness and diversity, and dominated by opportunistic pathogens such as Clostridioides difficile and multidrug-resistant bacteria. These alterations are associated with an increased risk of infectious complications or death. Specifically, at the time of writing, it appears possible to identify distinct microbiota patterns associated with severity or infectivity in COVID-19 patients, paving the way for the potential use of dysbiosis markers to predict patient outcomes. Correcting the microbiota disturbances to avoid their consequences is now possible. Fecal microbiota transplantation is recommended in recurrent C. difficile infections and microbiota-protecting treatments such as antibiotic inactivators are currently being developed. The growing interest in the microbiota and microbiota-associated therapies suggests that the control of the dysbiosis could be a key factor in the management of critically ill patients. The present narrative review aims to provide a synthetic overview of microbiota, from healthy individuals to critically ill patients. After an introduction to the different techniques used for studying the microbiota, we review the determinants involved in the alteration of the microbiota in ICU patients and the latter's consequences. Last, we assess the means to prevent or correct microbiota alteration.

Probiotic prophylaxis to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia in children on mechanical ventilation: A randomized double-blind clinical trial

PURPOSE

Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia (VAP) is one of the most common nosocomial infections in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU). Using new strategies to prevent nosocomial infections is crucial to avoid antibiotic resistance. One of these strategies is the utilization of probiotics. This study aims to investigate the efficacy of probiotic prophylaxis in preventing VAP in mechanically ventilated children.

METHOD

This study was a randomized, double-blind clinical trial. The study included 72 children under 12 years of age under mechanical ventilation for more than 48 h in the Mofid Children's Hospital. Patients were randomly divided into Limosilactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938 probiotic recipients (n = 38) and placebo groups (n = 34). In addition to the standard treatment, both groups received a sachet containing probiotics or a placebo twice a day. Children were screened for VAP based on clinical and laboratory evidence.

RESULTS

The mean age of children in the intervention and placebo groups was 4.60 ± 4.84 and 3.38 ± 3.49 years, respectively. After adjusting the other variables, it was observed that chance of VAP among probiotics compared to the placebo group was significantly decreased (OR adjusted = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.09-0.95). Also, probiotic was associated with a significantly lower chance of diarrhea than the placebo group (OR adjusted = 0.09; 95% CI: 0.01-0.96).

CONCLUSION

Probiotic utilization is effective in preventing the incidence of VAP and diarrhea in children under mechanical ventilation in the PICU.

Effects of Probiotics in Conditions or Infections Similar to COVID-19 on Health Outcomes: An Evidence Analysis Center Scoping Review

Probiotics have been suggested as a potential intervention for improving outcomes, particularly ventilatory-associated pneumonia, in patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, with the rapid development of the COVID-19 pandemic, there is little direct evidence available in infected patients. The objective of this scoping review is to examine the availability and nature of literature describing the effect of probiotics in adults with conditions or infections similar to COVID-19 infection on related health outcomes. MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Databases were searched for studies published from 1999 to May 1, 2020, examining the effect of probiotics in conditions applicable to individuals infected with COVID-19, including, but not limited to, other forms of coronavirus, critical illness, and mechanical ventilation. The databases search identified 1925 unique articles, 77 full-text articles were reviewed, and 48 studies were included in this scoping review, including 31 primary studies and 17 systematic reviews. Primary studies examined a range of interventions that varied by probiotic diversity and types, including 8 studies that focused on synbiotics, which include both pre- and probiotics. Several systematic reviews examined the effect of probiotics on ventilator-associated pneumonia and other infections. Although most systematic reviews concluded probiotics may improve these outcomes, most systematic review authors concluded that the evidence was low in quality and high in heterogeneity. In the absence of direct evidence with patients infected with COVID-19, studies in comparable populations are currently the best resource to guide probiotics interventions in conjunction with clinical expertise and multidisciplinary health care planning.

Synbiotic Therapy Prevents Nosocomial Infection in Critically Ill Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Based on a Bayesian Framework

Background: The efficacy of synbiotics, probiotics, prebiotics, enteral nutrition or adjuvant peripheral parenteral nutrition (EPN) and total parenteral nutrition (TPN) in preventing nosocomial infection (NI) in critically ill adults has been questioned. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate and rank the effectiveness of these therapies on NI amongst critically ill adults.

Methods: Four electronic databases were systematically searched up to June 30, 2019 for RCTs comparing the administration of probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, EPN and TPN in critically ill adults. The primary outcome was NI. The relative efficacy of all outcomes was determined by a Bayesian framework with random effects NMA. We estimated the odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) and ranked the comparative effects of all regimens with the surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities. The study has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42019147032).

Results: Fifty-five RCTs (7,119 patients) were identified. Primary outcome showed that synbiotics had the best effect in preventing NI than EPN (OR 0.37; 95% CrI 0.22–0.61), probiotics followed (OR 0.52; 95% CrI 0.34–0.77), whereas TPN significantly increased NI (OR 2.29; 95% CrI 1.48–3.67). Subgroup analysis showed that TPN significantly increased NI in intensive care unit (ICU) patients (OR 1.57; 95% CrI 1.01–2.56) and severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) patients (OR 3.93; 95% CrI 1.74–9.15). Secondary outcomes showed that synbiotics were more effective in preventing hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) (OR 0.34; 95% CrI 0.11–0.85), catheter-related bloodstream infection (OR 0.08; 95% CrI 0.01–0.80), urinary tract infection (OR 0.27; 95% CrI 0.08–0.71) and sepsis (OR 0.34; 95% CrI 0.16–0.70) than EPN. Amongst the treatments, probiotics were most effective for shortening the mechanical ventilation duration (MD −3.93; 95% CrI −7.98 to −0.02), prebiotics were most effective for preventing diarrhea (OR 0.24; 95% CrI 0.05–0.94) and TPN was the least effective in shortening hospital length of stay (MD 4.23; 95% CrI 0.97–7.33).

Conclusions: Amongst the five therapies, synbiotics not only prevented NI in critically ill adults but also demonstrated the best treatment results. By contrast, TPN did not prevent NI and ranked last, especially in ICU and SAP patients.

Take-Home Message: Nosocomial infection is a leading cause of mortality in critically ill patients in the ICU. However, the efficacy of synbiotics, probiotics, prebiotics, enteral nutrition or adjuvant peripheral parenteral nutrition and total parenteral nutrition in preventing nosocomial infection in critically ill adults has been questioned. The network meta-analysis provides evidence that amongst the five therapies, synbiotics not only prevented NI in critically ill adults but also demonstrated the best treatment results. By contrast, TPN did not prevent NI and ranked last, especially in ICU and SAP patients. The results of this study will provide a new scientific basis and a new idea for the debate on the efficacy of synbiotics and other treatments in the improvement of prognosis in critically ill adult patients.

Tweet: Synbiotic prevents nosocomial infection in critically ill adults, while total parenteral nutrition has the adverse curative.

Effect of gut microbiota modulation on feeding tolerance of enterally fed critically ill adult patients: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of pre-, pro-, and synbiotics on feeding tolerance of enterally fed critically ill adult patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Science Direct, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to November 2019. English language randomized controlled trials reporting the effect of pre, pro or synbiotics on the feeding tolerance of enterally fed critically ill adult patients were included.

RESULTS

Overall, 15 papers were selected for review. Among six studies reporting the energy intake, only two studies showed significantly higher energy intake in the prebiotic-receiving groups. Among four RCTs reporting frequency or time to achieve the target calorie, only one found a significant effect of probiotics to reduce the time to achieve a target dose of calorie. About the prevalence or duration of diarrhea, 7 out of 12 RCTs reported a beneficial effect. All but one study found no beneficial effects for gut microbiota manipulation on clinical endpoints including length of stay (LOS) in hospital and intensive care unit (ICU).

CONCLUSION

It should be noticed that the heterogeneity in study designs, product format, and ICU patient populations makes it difficult to draw any general conclusion. Overall, it seems that pre, pro, or synbiotics have no significant beneficial effect on feeding tolerance and clinical endpoints in critically ill adults, but they may reduce the prevalence or duration of diarrhea.

Do probiotics help prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients? A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Probiotic treatments might contribute to the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Due to its unclear clinical effects, here we intend to assess the preventive effect and safety of probiotics on intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

METHODS

Eligible randomised controlled trials were selected in databases until 30 September 2019. The characteristics of the studies were extracted, including study design, definition of VAP, probiotics intervention, category of included patients, incidence of VAP, mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) and ICU stay. Heterogeneity was evaluated by Chi-squared and I2 tests.

RESULTS

15 studies involving 2039 patients were identified for analysis. The pooled analysis suggests significant reduction on VAP (risk ratio, 0.68; 95% Cl, 0.60 to 0.77; p<0.00001) in a fixed-effects model. Subgroup analyses performed on the category of clinical and microbiological criteria both support the above conclusion; however, there were no significant differences in duration of MV or length of ICU stay in a random-effects model. Also, no significant differences in total mortality, overall mortality, 28-day mortality or 90-day mortality were found in the fixed-effects model.

CONCLUSIONS

The probiotics helped to prevent VAP without impacting the duration of MV, length of ICU stay or mortality.

Preventive Effect of Probiotics on Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: A Meta-analysis of 2428 Patients

BACKGROUND

Researchers had contradictory conclusions about the role of probiotics in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), which has led to the controversial use of probiotics in mechanically ventilated patients.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the efficacy and safety of probiotics in preventing VAP.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in 7 medical databases. Two investigators assessed literature quality independently and collected data. The primary outcome was the incidence of VAP. Secondary outcomes included 16 measures. Sensitivity analysis and subgroup and meta-regression analyses were performed to analyze the source of heterogeneity. P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant, and CIs were set at 95%. A random-effects model was set when I² <50%, otherwise a fixed-effects model was used.

RESULTS

A total of 20 randomized controlled studies with a total of 2428 patients were analyzed. Pooled results showed positive effects of probiotics on the reduction of VAP incidence (risk ratio [RR] = 0.672; P < 0.001; I² = 11.3%), length of ICU stay (WMD = -1.417; P = 0.012; I² = 90.7%), oropharyngeal (RR = 0.866; P = 0.031; I² = 12.4%) and gastric (RR = 0.645; P < 0.001; I² = 30.2%) colonization.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Probiotics can reduce the incidence of VAP and reduce oropharyngeal and gastric bacterial colonization. The results also suggest that probiotics do not cause adverse effects.

Efficacy of probiotics in the prevention of VAP in critically ill ICU patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials

Introduction

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is reported as the second most common nosocomial infection among critically ill patients with the incidence ranging from 2 to 16 episodes per 1000 ventilator days. The use of probiotics has been shown to have a promising effect in many RCTs. Our systematic review and meta-analysis were thus planned to determine the effect of probiotic use in critically ill ventilated adult patients on the incidence of VAP, length of hospital stay, length of ICU stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, the incidence of diarrhea, and the incidence of oropharyngeal colonization and in-hospital mortality.

Methodology

Systematic search of various databases (such as Embase, Cochrane, and Pubmed), published journals, clinical trials, and abstracts of the various major conferences were made to obtain the RCTs which compare probiotics with placebo for VAP prevention. The results were expressed as risk ratios or mean differences. Data synthesis was done using statistical software - Review Manager (RevMan) Version 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020).

Results

Nine studies met our inclusion criterion and were included in the meta-analysis. The incidence of VAP (risk ratio: 0.70, CI 0.56, 0.88; P = 0.002; I² = 37%), duration of mechanical ventilation (mean difference −3.75, CI −6.93, −0.58; P 0.02; I² = 96%), length of ICU stay (mean difference −4.20, CI −6.73, −1.66; P = 0.001; I² = 84%) and in-hospital mortality (OR 0.73, CI 0.54, 0.98; P = 0.04; I² = 0%) in the probiotic group was significantly lower than that in the control group. Probiotic administration was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in length of hospital stay (MD −1.94, CI −7.17, 3.28; P = 0.47; I² = 88%), incidence of oro-pharyngeal colonization (OR 0.59, CI 0.33, 1.04; P = 0.07; I² = 69%), and incidence of diarrhea (OR 0.59, CI 0.34, 1.03; P = 0.06; I² = 38%).

Discussion

Our meta-analysis shows that probiotic administration has a promising role in lowering the incidence of VAP, the duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, and in-hospital mortality.

Therapeutic Potential of the Gut Microbiota in the Management of Sepsis

This article is one of ten reviews selected from the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine 2020. Other selected articles can be found online at https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/annualupdate2020. Further information about the Annual Update in Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine is available from http://www.springer.com/series/8901.

Synbiotics for prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a probiotics strain-specific network meta-analysis

Objective

Probiotics may be efficacious in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to clarify the efficacy of different types of probiotics for preventing VAP.

Methods

This systematic review and NMA was conducted according to the updated preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic literature search of public databases from inception to 17 June 2018 was performed.

Results

NMA showed that “Bifidobacterium longum + Lactobacillus bulgaricus + Streptococcus thermophiles” was more efficacious than “Ergyphilus” in preventing VAP (odds ratio: 0.15, 95% confidence interval: 0.03–0.94). According to pairwise meta-analysis, “B. longum + L. bulgaricus + S. thermophiles” and “Lactobacillus rhamnosus” were superior to placebo in preventing VAP. Treatment rank based on surface under the cumulative ranking curves revealed that the most efficacious treatment for preventing VAP was “B. longum + L. bulgaricus + S. thermophiles” (66%). In terms of reducing hospital mortality and ICU mortality, the most efficacious treatment was Synbiotic 2000FORTE (34% and 46%, respectively).

Conclusions

Based on efficacy ranking, “B. longum + L. bulgaricus + S. thermophiles” should be the first choice for prevention of VAP, while Synbiotic 2000FORTE has the potential to reduce in-hospital mortality and ICU mortality.

Manipulation of the microbiome in critical illness-probiotics as a preventive measure against ventilator-associated pneumonia

Objective

To describe the possible modes of action of probiotics and provide a systematic review of the current evidence on the efficacy of probiotics to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in critically ill patients.

Methods

We conducted an unrestricted search of the English language medical literature. For each individual study, the relative risk of VAP was calculated using the reported primary outcome data.

Results

The search identified a total of 72 articles. Eight articles enrolling a total of 1229 patients fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. In four trials, the investigators were blinded for the intervention, and two trials used an intention-to-treat analysis. Loss to follow-up with regard to the primary endpoint ranged from 0 to 14% in the intervention groups and from 0 to 16% in the control groups. The incidence of VAP expressed as the percentage of studied patients was reported in seven trials. The incidence of VAP ranged from 4 to 36% in the intervention groups and from 13 to 50% in the control groups. The relative risk for VAP ranged between 0.30 and 1.41. Three trials showed a significant difference in favor of probiotic therapy between the intervention and the control groups.

Conclusions

The incidence of VAP tended to be lower in patients treated with probiotics in most trials identified by the systematic search. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies and the low quality of evidence, it remains difficult to draw firm conclusions. The efficacy of preventive probiotics should be studied in more detail in future trials. Application of probiotics for the prevention of VAP seems to be safe with only few side effects reported in the selected trials.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s40635-019-0238-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Synbiotics modulate gut microbiota and reduce enteritis and ventilator-associated pneumonia in patients with sepsis: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Commensal microbiota deteriorate in critically ill patients. The preventive effects of probiotic/synbiotic therapy on microbiota and septic complications have not been thoroughly clarified in patients with sepsis. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether synbiotics have effects on gut microbiota and reduce complications in mechanically ventilated patients with sepsis.

METHODS

Sepsis patients who were mechanically ventilated in the intensive care unit (ICU) were included in this randomized controlled study. Patients receiving daily synbiotics (Bifidobacterium breve strain Yakult, Lactobacillus casei strain Shirota, and galactooligosaccharides) initiated within 3 days after admission (the Synbiotics group) were compared with patients who did not receive synbiotics (the No-Synbiotics group). The primary outcome was infectious complications including enteritis, ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), and bacteremia within 4 weeks from admission. The secondary outcomes included mortality within 4 weeks, fecal bacterial counts, and organic acid concentration. Enteritis was defined as the acute onset of continuous liquid stools for more than 12 h.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients completed this trial; 35 patients received synbiotics and 37 patients did not receive synbiotics. The incidence of enteritis was significantly lower in the Synbiotics than the No-Synbiotics group (6.3% vs. 27.0%; p < 0.05). The incidence of VAP was also significantly lower in the Synbiotics than the No-Synbiotics group (14.3% vs. 48.6%; p < 0.05). The incidence of bacteremia and mortality did not differ significantly between the two groups. In the analysis of fecal bacteria, the number of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus in the Synbiotics group was significantly higher than that in the No-Synbiotics group. In the analysis of fecal organic acids, total organic acid concentration, especially the amounts of acetate, were significantly greater in the Synbiotics group than in the No-Synbiotics group at the first week (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic synbiotics could modulate the gut microbiota and environment and may have preventive effects on the incidence of enteritis and VAP in patients with sepsis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN, R000007633 . Registered on 29 September 2011.

Rapid gastrointestinal loss of Clostridial Clusters IV and XIVa in the ICU associates with an expansion of gut pathogens

Commensal gastrointestinal bacteria resist the expansion of pathogens and are lost during critical illness, facilitating pathogen colonization and infection. We performed a prospective, ICU-based study to determine risk factors for loss of gut colonization resistance during the initial period of critical illness. Rectal swabs were taken from adult ICU patients within 4 hours of admission and 72 hours later, and analyzed using 16S rRNA gene sequencing and selective culture for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE). Microbiome data was visualized using principal coordinate analyses (PCoA) and assessed using a linear discriminant analysis algorithm and logistic regression modeling. 93 ICU patients were analyzed. At 72 hours following ICU admission, there was a significant decrease in the proportion of Clostridial Clusters IV/XIVa, taxa that produce short chain fatty acids (SCFAs). At the same time, there was a significant expansion in Enterococcus. Decreases in Cluster IV/XIVa Clostridia were associated with loss of gut microbiome colonization resistance (reduced diversity and community stability over time). In multivariable analysis, both decreased Cluster IV/XIVa Clostridia and increased Enterococcus after 72 hours were associated with receipt of antibiotics. Cluster IV/XIVa Clostridia, although a small fraction of the overall gastrointestinal microbiome, drove distinct clustering on PCoA. During initial treatment for critical illness, there was a loss of Cluster IV/XIVa Clostridia within the distal gut microbiome which associated with an expansion of VRE and with a loss of gut microbiome colonization resistance. Receipt of broad-spectrum antibiotics was associated with these changes.

Safety and efficacy of N-acetyl-cysteine for prophylaxis of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial

Ventilator-associated-pneumonia (VAP) is characterized by morbidity, mortality, and prolonged length of stay in intensive care unit (ICU). The present study aimed to examine the effect of N-acetyl-cysteine (NAC) in preventing VAP in patients hospitalized in ICU. We performed a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 60 mechanically ventilated patients at high risk of developing VAP. NAC (600 mg/twice daily) and placebo (twice daily) were administered to NAC group (n = 30) and control group (n = 30), respectively, through the nasogastric tube in addition to routine care. The clinical response was considered as primary (incidence of VAP) and secondary outcomes. Twenty-two (36.6%) patients developed VAP. Patients treated with NAC were significantly less likely to develop clinically confirmed VAP compared with patients treated with placebo (26.6% vs. 46.6%; P = 0.032). Patients treated with NAC had significantly less ICU length of stay (14.36 ± 4.69 days vs. 17.81 ± 6.37 days, P = 0.028) and less hospital stay (19.23 ± 5.54 days vs. 24.61 ± 6.81 days; P = 0.03) than patients treated with placebo. Time to VAP was significantly longer in the NAC group (9.42 ± 1.9 days vs. 6.46 ± 2.53 days; P = 0.002). The incidence of complete recovery was significantly higher in the NAC group (56.6% vs. 30%; P = 0.006). No adverse events related to NAC were identified. NAC is safe and effective to prevent and delay VAP, and improve its complete recovery rate in a selected, high-risk ICU population.

Unusually High Incidences of Staphylococcus aureus Infection within Studies of Ventilator Associated Pneumonia Prevention Using Topical Antibiotics: Benchmarking the Evidence Base

Selective digestive decontamination (SDD, topical antibiotic regimens applied to the respiratory tract) appears effective for preventing ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. However, potential contextual effects of SDD on Staphylococcus aureus infections in the ICU remain unclear. The S. aureus ventilator associated pneumonia (S. aureus VAP), VAP overall and S. aureus bacteremia incidences within component (control and intervention) groups within 27 SDD studies were benchmarked against 115 observational groups. Component groups from 66 studies of various interventions other than SDD provided additional points of reference. In 27 SDD study control groups, the mean S. aureus VAP incidence is 9.6% (95% CI; 6.9–13.2) versus a benchmark derived from 115 observational groups being 4.8% (95% CI; 4.2–5.6). In nine SDD study control groups the mean S. aureus bacteremia incidence is 3.8% (95% CI; 2.1–5.7) versus a benchmark derived from 10 observational groups being 2.1% (95% CI; 1.1–4.1). The incidences of S. aureus VAP and S. aureus bacteremia within the control groups of SDD studies are each higher than literature derived benchmarks. Paradoxically, within the SDD intervention groups, the incidences of both S. aureus VAP and VAP overall are more similar to the benchmarks.

Probiotics for Preventing Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Mechanically Ventilated Patients: A Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis

Background and Objective: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is still an important cause of morbidity and mortality in mechanically ventilated patients. The efficacy of the probiotics for preventing VAP is still controversial. Present study was conducted to comprehensively evaluate the effect of probiotics on VAP prevention in mechanically ventilated patients.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched up to September 2016. Eligible trials designed with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics with control in mechanically ventilated patients were included. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated with fixed or random effects models. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed using TSA 0.9beta software.

Results: Thirteen RCTs (N = 1969) were included. Overall, probiotics were associated with reduced incidence of VAP (RR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.60–0.89; P = 0.002), which was confirmed by TSA (TSA adjusted 95% CI = 0.55–0.96). However, no significant difference was observed in 90-day mortality (RR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.72–1.37; P = 0.99), overall mortality (RR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.70–1.02; P = 0.09), 28-day mortality (RR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.72–1.57; P = 0.99), intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.74–1.27; P = 0.82), hospital mortality (RR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.65–1.02; P = 0.07), diarrhea (RR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.83–1.19; P = 0.92), length of ICU stay (MD = −2.40 days, 95% CI = −6.75 to 1.95; P = 0.28), length of hospital stay (MD = −1.34 days, 95% CI = −6.21 to 3.54; P = 0.59), and duration of mechanical ventilation (MD = −3.32 days, 95% CI = −6.74 to 0.09; P = 0.06).

Conclusions: In this meta-analysis, we found that probiotics could reduce the incidence of VAP in mechanically ventilated patients. It seems likely that probiotics provide clinical benefits for mechanically ventilated patients.

The function of probiotics on the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP): facts and gaps

Probiotics have been used for centuries in making fermented dairy products. The health benefits related to probiotics consumption are well recognized and they are generally regarded as safe (GRAS). Their therapeutic effects are due to the production of a variety of antimicrobial compounds, such as short-chain fatty acids, organic acids (such as lactic, acetic, formic, propionic and butyric acids), ethanol, hydrogen peroxide and bacteriocins. Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a nosocomial infection associated with high mortality in intensive care units. VAP can result from endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. These interventions increase the risk of infection as patients lose the natural barrier between the oropharynx and the trachea, which in turn facilitates the entry of pathogens through the aspiration of oropharyngeal secretions containing bacteria into the lung. In order to prevent this, probiotics have been used extensively against VAP. This review is an update containing information extracted from recent studies on the use of probiotics to treat VAP. In addition, probiotic safety, the therapeutic properties of probiotics, the probiotic strains used and the action of the probiotics mechanism are reviewed. Furthermore, the therapeutic effects of probiotic treatment procedures for VAP are compared to those of antibiotics. Finally, the influences of bacteriocin on the growth of human pathogens, and the side-effects and limitations of using probiotics for the treatment of VAP are addressed.

Probiotic and synbiotic therapy in critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Critical illness is characterized by a loss of commensal flora and an overgrowth of potentially pathogenic bacteria, leading to a high susceptibility to nosocomial infections. Probiotics are living non-pathogenic microorganisms, which may protect the gut barrier, attenuate pathogen overgrowth, decrease bacterial translocation and prevent infection. The purpose of this updated systematic review is to evaluate the overall efficacy of probiotics and synbiotic mixtures on clinical outcomes in critical illness.

Methods

Computerized databases from 1980 to 2016 were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating clinical outcomes associated with probiotic therapy as a single strategy or in combination with prebiotic fiber (synbiotics). Overall number of new infections was the primary outcome; secondary outcomes included mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), and diarrhea. Subgroup analyses were performed to elucidate the role of other key factors such as probiotic type and patient mortality risk on the effect of probiotics on outcomes.

Results

Thirty trials that enrolled 2972 patients were identified for analysis. Probiotics were associated with a significant reduction in infections (risk ratio 0.80, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.68, 0.95, P = 0.009; heterogeneity I² = 36 %, P = 0.09). Further, a significant reduction in the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) was found (risk ratio 0.74, 95 % CI 0.61, 0. 90, P = 0.002; I² = 19 %). No effect on mortality, LOS or diarrhea was observed. Subgroup analysis indicated that the greatest improvement in the outcome of infections was in critically ill patients receiving probiotics alone versus synbiotic mixtures, although limited synbiotic trial data currently exists.

Conclusion

Probiotics show promise in reducing infections, including VAP in critical illness. Currently, clinical heterogeneity and potential publication bias reduce strong clinical recommendations and indicate further high quality clinical trials are needed to conclusively prove these benefits.

Effect of probiotics on the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients: a randomized controlled multicenter trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the potential preventive effect of probiotics on ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP).

METHODS

This was an open-label, randomized, controlled multicenter trial involving 235 critically ill adult patients who were expected to receive mechanical ventilation for ≥48 h. The patients were randomized to receive (1) a probiotics capsule containing live Bacillus subtilis and Enterococcus faecalis (Medilac-S) 0.5 g three times daily through a nasogastric feeding tube plus standard preventive strategies or (2) standard preventive strategies alone, for a maximum of 14 days. The development of VAP was evaluated daily, and throat swabs and gastric aspirate were cultured at baseline and once or twice weekly thereafter.

RESULTS

The incidence of microbiologically confirmed VAP in the probiotics group was significantly lower than that in the control patients (36.4 vs. 50.4 %, respectively; P = 0.031). The mean time to develop VAP was significantly longer in the probiotics group than in the control group (10.4 vs. 7.5 days, respectively; P = 0.022). The proportion of patients with acquisition of gastric colonization of potentially pathogenic microorganisms (PPMOs) was lower in the probiotics group (24 %) than the control group (44 %) (P = 0.004). However, the proportion of patients with eradication PPMO colonization on both sites of the oropharynx and stomach were not significantly different between the two groups. The administration of probiotics did not result in any improvement in the incidence of clinically suspected VAP, antimicrobial consumption, duration of mechanical ventilation, mortality and length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Therapy with the probiotic bacteria B. Subtilis and E. faecalis are an effective and safe means for preventing VAP and the acquisition of PPMO colonization in the stomach.

Microbiota Modulation With Synbiotic Decreases Liver Fibrosis in a High Fat Choline Deficient Diet Mice Model of Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis (NASH)

BACKGROUND

Gut microbiota may play a role in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). Previous studies showed that prebiotics and probiotics might halt the progression of steatohepatitis.

AIM

To clarify the potential effect of Synbiotic 2000^®Forte (Synb) in preventing or ameliorating diet induced steatohepatitis, particularly in fibrosis progression and how this intervention correlates with gut microbiota composition and endotoxinemia.

METHODS

Twenty-seven C57BL/6 mice were divided into three groups: chow diet (CD, n = 7); high-fat choline deficient diet (HFCD, n = 10) and HFCD diet supplemented with Synbiotic 2000^®Forte (four probiotic strains and four prebiotics mixture) (HFCD + Synb, n = 10). At 6 and 18 weeks, blood samples (lipopolysaccharides assay - LPS), cecal feaces (gut microbiota) and liver tissue (histology) were collected for analysis.

RESULTS

Both HCFD diet mice developed steatohepatitis with ballooning at 6 and 18 weeks, opposite to CD. Comparison of histological scores in HFCD and HFCD + Synb, at 6 and 18 weeks showed no significant difference regarding steatosis, inflammation, or ballooning. Evaluating fibrosis with Sirius Red, and degree of smooth-muscle cell activation, HFCD mice had significantly more fibrosis; addition of Synb significantly reduced fibrosis at 6 weeks and 18 weeks. Serum endotoxin levels were similarly increased in HFCD and HFCD + Synb at week 6; however at week 18 HFCD + Synb had significantly lower endotoxin levels than HFCD. Gut microbiota of HFCD vs CD, showed no significant differences regarding the phyla Firmicutes and Bacteroidetes, either at 6 or 18 weeks; Proteobacteria increased at 6 week (3.3) and 18 week (7.5), while the addition of Synb resulted in a decrease at week 18 (-3.90). Fusobacteria markedly increase at week 18 (10.0), but less so with the addition of Synb (5.2).

CONCLUSION

Synbiotic 2000^®Forte is able to modulate the mouse gut microbiota reducing the degree of fibrosis while simultaneously decreasing endotoxemia.

The administration of probiotics and synbiotics in immune compromised adults: is it safe?

This study aimed to systematically evaluate safety of probiotics and synbiotics in immune compromised adults (≥18 years). Safety was analysed using the Common Terminology Clinical Adverse Events (CTCAE version 4.0) classification, thereby providing an update on previous reports using the most recent available clinical data (2008-2013). Safety aspects are represented and related to number of participants per probiotic strain/culture, study duration, dosage, clinical condition and selected afflictions. Analysis of 57 clinical studies indicates that probiotic and/or synbiotic administration in immune compromised adults is safe with regard to the current evaluated probiotic strains, dosages and duration. Individuals were considered immune compromised if HIV-infected, critically ill, underwent surgery or had an organ- or an autoimmune disease. There were no major safety concerns in the study, as none of the serious adverse events (AE)s were related, or suspected to be related, to the probiotic or synbiotic product and the study products were well tolerated. Overall, AEs occurred less frequent in immune compromised subjects receiving probiotics and/or synbiotics compared to the control group. In addition, the results demonstrated a flaw in precise reporting and classification of AE in most studies. Furthermore, generalisability of conclusions are greatly limited by the inconsistent, imprecise and potentially incomplete reporting as well as the variation in probiotic strains, dosages, administration regimes, study populations and reported outcomes. We argue that standardised reporting on adverse events (CTCAE) in 'food' studies should be obligatory, thereby improving reliability of data and re-enforcing the safety profile of probiotics.

Pre-treatment with probiotics prolongs survival after experimental infection by multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in rodents: an effect on sepsis-induced immunosuppression

Based on several randomised clinical studies indicating benefit from oral probiotic intake for the prevention of hospital-acquired infections in critically ill patients, this study aimed to explain the mechanism of action of probiotics for the prevention of lethal experimental infection by multidrug-resistant (MDR) Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Experiments using an Escherichia coli strain susceptible to all antimicrobials were also conducted. C57BL/6 mice were pre-treated intraperitoneally with sterile water for injection or Lactobacillus plantarum. Survival was recorded and mice were sacrificed for measurement of apoptosis and tissue bacterial overgrowth and for isolation and culture of splenocytes for cytokine production. Experiments were repeated after pre-treatment with a commercial preparation of four probiotics (L. plantarum, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Saccharomyces boulardii and Bifidobacterium lactis; LactoLevure(®)). Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) of healthy volunteers were stimulated by heat-killed P. aeruginosa following pre-treatment with medium or probiotics. Pre-treatment with L. plantarum significantly prolonged survival after challenge by either MDR P. aeruginosa (66.7% vs. 31.3%; P=0.026) or E. coli (56.0% vs. 12.0%, P=0.003). Survival benefit was even more pronounced when mice were pre-treated with LactoLevure(®). Tissue bacterial outgrowth and apoptosis of white blood cells and splenocytes were not altered. TNFα and IL-10 production by splenocytes of mice pre-treated with probiotic was increased and IFNγ production was decreased. Pre-treatment with LactoLevure(®) restored production of IL-17. Stimulation of human PBMCs after probiotic pre-treatment was accompanied by reduced gene expression of SOCS3. The results suggest that the protective effect of probiotics is mediated through prevention of sepsis-induced immunosuppression.

Effects of probiotics in treatment of severe acute pancreatitis

AIM: To investigate the effects of probiotics in the treatment of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP).

METHODS: Thirty-nine SAP patients were randomly divided into two groups: a control group and a treatment group. The treatment group was given probiotics through the nasointestinal feeding tube, and the control group was given placebo (starch preparations). Infectious complications (including infected necrosis of the pancreas, pneumonia, urosepsis and bacteraemia), duration of intensive care, and rates of percutaneous drainage, intestinal ischemia and necrosis were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS: There was no significant difference (P > 0.05) in infectious complications, duration of intensive care or the rate of percutaneous drainage between the two groups, but the rate of intestinal ischemia and necrosis was significantly higher in the treatment group than in the control group.

CONCLUSION: Using probiotics does not reduce infectious complications, shorten the duration of intensive care, or reduce the rate of percutaneous drainage in patients with SAP, but increase the rate of intestinal ischemia and necrosis.

Probiotics for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is common in intensive care units (ICUs). Some evidence indicates that probiotics may reduce the incidence of VAP. Several additional published studies have demonstrated that probiotics are safe and efficacious in preventing VAP in ICUs. We aimed to systematically summarise the results of all available data to generate the best evidence for the prevention of VAP.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of probiotics for preventing VAP.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1948 to September week 1, 2014) and EMBASE (2010 to September 2014).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics with placebo or another control (excluding RCTs that use probiotics in both study groups) to prevent VAP.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility and the quality of trials, and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight RCTs, with 1083 participants. All studies compared a form of probiotic (Lactobacillus casei rhamnosus; Lactobacillus plantarum; Synbiotic 2000FORTE; Ergyphilus; combination Bifidobacterium longum + Lactobacillus bulgaricus + Streptococcus thermophilus) versus a control group (placebo; glutamine; fermentable fibre; peptide; chlorhexidine). The analysis of all RCTs showed that the use of probiotics decreased the incidence of VAP (odds ratio (OR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52 to 0.95, low quality evidence). However, the aggregated results were uncertain for ICU mortality (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.22 very low quality evidence), in-hospital mortality (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.14, very low quality evidence), incidence of diarrhoea (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.09, very low quality evidence), length of ICU stay (mean difference (MD) -1.60, 95% CI -6.53 to 3.33, very low quality evidence), duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -6.15, 95% CI -18.77 to 6.47, very low quality evidence) and antibiotic use (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.96, low quality evidence). Antibiotics for VAP were used for a shorter duration (in days) when participants received probiotics in one small study (MD -3.00, 95% CI -6.04 to 0.04). However, the CI of the estimated effect was too wide to exclude no difference with probiotics. There were no reported events of nosocomial probiotic infections in any included study.The overall methodological quality of the included studies, based on our 'Risk of bias' assessments, was moderate with half of the included studies rated as a 'low' risk of bias; however, we rated four included studies as a 'high' risk of bias across one or more of the domains. The study limitations, differences in probiotics administered and participants, and small sample sizes across the included studies mean that the power to detect a trend of overall effect may be limited and chance findings cannot be excluded.To explore the influence of some potential confounding factors in the studies, we conducted an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, which did not change the inference of per-protocol analysis. However, our sensitivity analysis did not indicate a significant difference between groups for instances of VAP.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that use of probiotics is associated with a reduction in the incidence of VAP. However, the quality of the evidence is low and the exclusion of the one study that did not provide a robust definition of VAP increased the uncertainty in this finding. The available evidence is not clear regarding a decrease in ICU or hospital mortality with probiotic use. Three trials reported on the incidence of diarrhoea and the pooled results indicate no clear evidence of a difference. The results of this meta-analysis do not provide sufficient evidence to draw conclusions on the efficacy and safety of probiotics for the prevention of VAP in ICU patients.

How outcomes are defined in clinical trials of mechanically ventilated adults and children

Systematic reviews have considerable potential to provide evidence-based data to aid clinical decision-making. However, there is growing recognition that trials involving mechanical ventilation lack consistency in the definition and measurement of ventilation outcomes, creating difficulties in combining data for meta-analyses. To address the inconsistency in outcome definitions, international standards for trial registration and clinical trial protocols published recommendations, effectively setting the "gold standard" for reporting trial outcomes. In this Critical Care Perspective, we review the problems resulting from inconsistent outcome definitions and inconsistent reporting of outcomes (outcome sets). We present data highlighting the variability of the most commonly reported ventilation outcome definitions. Ventilation outcomes reported in trials over the last 6 years typically fall into four domains: measures of ventilator dependence; adverse outcomes; mortality; and resource use. We highlight the need, first, for agreement on outcome definitions and, second, for a minimum core outcome set for trials involving mechanical ventilation. A minimum core outcome set would not restrict trialists from measuring additional outcomes, but would overcome problems of variability in outcome selection, measurement, and reporting, thereby enhancing comparisons across trials.

Use of probiotics in the treatment of severe acute pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction

Necrotic tissue infection can worsen the prognosis of severe acute pancreatitis (SAP), and probiotics have been shown to be beneficial in reducing the infection rate in animal experiments and primary clinical trials. However, the results of multicenter randomized clinical trials have been contradictory. Our aim in this study was to systematically review and quantitatively analyze all randomized controlled trials with regard to important outcomes in patients with predicted SAP who received probiotics.

Methods

A systematic literature search of the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases was conducted using specific search terms. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that compared the effects of probiotic with placebo treatment in patients with predicted SAP. Mean difference (MD), risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed- and random-effects models. A meta-analysis on the use of probiotics in the treatment of critically ill patients was also performed to serve as a reference.

Results

In this study, 6 trials comprising an aggregate total of 536 patients were analyzed. Significant heterogeneities were observed in the type, dose, treatment duration and clinical effects of probiotics in these trials. Systematic analysis showed that probiotics did not significantly affect the pancreatic infection rate (RR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.74 to 1.93; P = 0.47), total infections (RR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.80 to 1.48; P = 0.57), operation rate (RR = 1.42, 95% CI = 0.43 to 3.47; P = 0.71), length of hospital stay (MD = 2.45, 95% CI = −2.71 to 7.60; P = 0.35) or mortality (RR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.42 to 1.45; P = 0.25).

Conclusions

Probiotics showed neither beneficial nor adverse effects on the clinical outcomes of patients with predicted SAP. However, significant heterogeneity was noted between the trials reviewed with regard to the type, dose and treatment duration of probiotics, which may have contributed to the heterogeneity of the clinical outcomes. The current data are not sufficient to draw a conclusion regarding the effects of probiotics on patients with predicted SAP. Carefully designed clinical trials are needed to validate the effects of particular probiotics given at specific dosages and for specific treatment durations.

A systematic review of the safety of probiotics

INTRODUCTION

There is growing evidence on the use of probiotics in various diseases, especially in gastrointestinal (GI) diseases. Although probiotics have been found helpful in many illnesses, they do not always seem to be safe. Through interference with commensal microflora, they can result in opportunistic performances in the host due to bacterimia and fungemia. Since considerable numbers of consumers use probiotic products worldwide, assurance of safety of these products is necessary.

AREAS COVERED

This review evaluates all the existing information about the safety of probiotics in humans and animal models up to May 2013. In all eligible published studies in which adverse effects and tolerability of probiotics were investigated and reported, no language limitations were applied. The main key search terms were 'probiotics,' 'safety,' 'side effects,' 'clinical trial' and 'adverse effects.' The vast majority of trials investigated Bifidobacterium (B) and Lactobacillus (L) species.

EXPERT OPINION

The main observed adverse effects of probiotics were sepsis, fungemia and GI ischemia. Generally, critically ill patients in intensive care units, critically sick infants, postoperative and hospitalized patients and patients with immune-compromised complexity were the most at-risk populations. While the overwhelming existing evidence suggests that probiotics are safe, complete consideration of risk-benefit ratio before prescribing is recommended.

Probiotics for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials

Background

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is considered to be a worldwide issue along with the development of supportive ventilation. The preventing strategy is of great importance for its poor prognostic and difficulties in treatment. Probiotics have been advocated as one of the possible preventive measures. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the potential benefits of probiotics.

Methods

The databases, Web of science, PubMed, Ovid and Cochrane lib were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) publications that compared the effectiveness of probiotics with placebo in the prevention of VAP. The incidence of VAP was considered as the primary endpoint, mortality, length of stay in intensive care units (ICUs), etiology of the infections were considered as secondary endpoints.

Results

A total of 844 patients from 5 trials were subjected to meta-analysis. Probiotics did not significantly decrease the incidence of VAP (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.85-1.04, p=0.22), however, the administration of probiotics reduced the risk of VAP caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) (RR 0.30, 95%CI 0.11-0.91, P=0.03). It failed to affect any other endpoints.

Conclusion

Probiotic prophylaxis of ventilator-associated pneumonia remained inconclusive and it failed to improve the prognosis of general mechanically ventilated patients. It was noteworthy that infections caused by P. aeruginosa was reduced by administration of probiotics. In further, it is recommended that advanced studies should exploit transformation in pathogenic microorganisms owing to administration of probiotics as well as the specific population.

Lack of efficacy of probiotics in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia probiotics for ventilator-associated pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) remains a common hazardous complication in patients who are mechanically ventilated and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality.We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of probiotics for the prevention of VAP.

METHODS

The PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing probiotics with control for VAP in adult patients undergoing mechanical ventilation.The primary outcome was the incidence of VAP. Secondary outcomes included ICU mortality,hospital mortality, urinary tract infection, catheter-related bloodstream infection, diarrhea, length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

A total of 1,142 patients from seven trials were subjected to meta-analysis. Probiotics did not significantly decrease the incidence of VAP (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.55-1.24; P 5 .35), with low heterogeneity among the studies ( I 2 5 36.5%, P 5 .15). Probiotics also did not appear to significantly alter any of the other meta-analysis end points.

CONCLUSIONS

The limited evidence suggests that probiotics show no beneficial effect in patients who are mechanically ventilated; thus, probiotics should not be recommended for routine clinical application. However, the results of this meta-analysis should be interpreted with caution because of the heterogeneity among study designs. Future studies should focus on the safety of probiotics.