Gut microbiota is not modified by Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial of VSL#3 in Diarrhea-predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Probiotics for the management of irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and three-level meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Previous systematic reviews demonstrated a potentially beneficial effect of probiotics on irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). However, these studies are either affected by the inclusion of insufficient trials or by the problem of dependent data across multiple outcomes, and an overall effect size has not been provided. We aimed to determine the effect of probiotics on IBS through a three-level meta-analysis and clarify potential effect moderators.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science, screening for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examine the effect of probiotics on IBS. The primary outcome was the improvement in the severity of global IBS symptoms at the end of treatment. The secondary outcomes were the improvement in abdominal pain and the quality of life. The effect sizes of the probiotics were measured by using the standardized mean difference (SMD) and pooled by a three-level meta-analysis model.

RESULTS

We included 72 RCTs in the analysis. The meta-analysis showed significantly better overall effect of probiotics than placebo on the global IBS symptoms (SMD -0.55, 95% CI -0.76 to -0.34, P <0.001), abdominal pain (SMD -0.89, 95% CI -1.29 to -0.5, P <0.001) and quality of life (SMD 0.99, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.54, P <0.001), respectively. Moderator analysis found that a treatment duration shorter than 4 weeks was associated with a larger effect size in all the outcomes, and Bacillus probiotics had better improvement on the abdominal pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Probiotics had a short-term effect and a medium effect size on the global IBS symptoms. Treatment duration and types of probiotics affected the effect size of probiotics, and shorter durations and Bacillus probiotics were associated with better treatment effects.

REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework.

Outcome-Specific Efficacy of Different Probiotic Strains and Mixtures in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a common gastrointestinal disease. The efficacy of different probiotics in treating IBS remains controversial. This network meta-analysis aimed to compare and rank the outcome-specific efficacy of different probiotic strains or combinations in adults with IBS. We searched the literature up to June 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of probiotics in IBS were included. A frequentist framework was used to perform this study. In total, 9253 participants from 81 RCTs were included in the study. Four probiotic strains and five mixtures were significantly superior to placebo in improving IBS Symptom Severity Scale, among which Lactobacillus acidophilus DDS-1 ranked first (surface under the cumulative ranking, SUCRA, 92.9%). A mixture containing five probiotics (SUCRA, 100%) ranked first in improving the IBS-Quality of life. Bacillus coagulans MTCC 5856 (SUCRA, 96.9%) and Bacillus coagulans Unique IS2 (SUCRA, 92.6%) were among the most effective probiotics for improving abdominal pain. Three probiotic strains and two mixtures were effective in alleviating abdominal bloating. Four probiotic strains and a mixture were significantly superior to placebo in reducing the bowel movement frequency in diarrhea-predominant IBS (IBS-D). Bacillus coagulans MTCC 5856 (SUCRA, 99.6%) and Saccharomyces cerevisiae CNCM I-3856 (SUCRA, 89.7%) were among the most effective probiotics for improving the Bristol stool form scale of IBS-D. Only some probiotics are effective for particular outcomes in IBS patients. This study provided the first ranking of outcome-specific efficacy of different probiotic strains and combinations in IBS. Further studies are needed to confirm these results.

Gastroparesis: The Complex Interplay with Microbiota and the Role of Exogenous Infections in the Pathogenesis of the Disease

Gastroparesis (GP) is a disorder of gastric functions that is defined by objective delayed gastric emptying in the absence of mechanical obstruction. This disease is characterized by symptoms such as nausea, post-prandial fullness, and early satiety. GP significantly impacts patients' quality of life and contributes to substantial healthcare expenses for families and society. However, the epidemiological burden of GP is difficult to evaluate, mainly due its significant overlap with functional dyspepsia (FD). GP and FD represent two similar diseases. The pathophysiology of both disorders involves abnormal gastric motility, visceral hypersensitivity, and mucosal inflammation. Moreover, both conditions share similar symptoms, such as epigastric pain, bloating, and early satiety. The latest evidence reveals that dysbiosis is directly or indirectly connected to gut-brain axis alterations, which are the basis of pathogenesis in both FD and GP. Furthermore, the role of microbiota in the development of gastroparesis was demonstrated by some clinical studies, which found that the use of probiotics is correlated with improvements in the gastric emptying time (GET). Infections (with viruses, bacteria, and protozoa) represent a proven etiology for GP but have not been sufficiently considered in current clinical practice. Previous viral infections can be found in about 20% of idiopathic GP cases. Moreover, delayed gastric emptying during systemic protozoal infections represents a huge concern for compromised patients, and few data exist on the topic. This comprehensive narrative review analyzes the relationship between microorganisms and GP. We explore, on the one hand, the correlation between gut microbiota dysbiosis and GP pathogenesis, including treatment implications, and, on the other hand, the association between exogenous infections and the etiology of the disease.

Could the Microbiota Be a Predictive Factor for the Clinical Response to Probiotic Supplementation in IBS-D? A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Increasing evidence suggests the beneficial effects of probiotics in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but little is known about how they can impact the gut microbiota. Our objective was to evaluate the effects of a multistrain probiotic on IBS symptoms, gut permeability and gut microbiota in patients with diarrhoea-predominant IBS (IBS-D).

METHODS

Adults with IBS-D were enrolled in an open-label trial to receive a multistrain probiotic for 4 weeks. Abdominal pain, stool frequency, quality of life, gut permeability, and the luminal and adherent microbiota from colonic biopsies were evaluated before and after supplementation.

RESULTS

Probiotics significantly improved symptoms and quality of life, despite having no impact on permeability in the global population. In the population stratified by the response, the diarrhoea responders displayed reduced colonic permeability after supplementation. The luminal and adherent microbiota were specifically altered depending on the patients' clinical responses regarding pain and diarrhoea. Interestingly, we identified a microbial signature in IBS-D patients that could predict a response or lack of response to supplementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The multistrain probiotic improved the symptoms of IBS-D patients and induced distinct effects on the gut microbiota according to the patient's clinical response and initial microbiota composition. Our study further supports the need to develop individualised probiotic-based approaches regarding IBS.

Probiotics therapy for adults with diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 10 RCTs

PURPOSE

Accumulating evidence showed that probiotics therapy might be effective in treating diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D). This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of probiotics therapy for the treatment of IBS-D.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature search in eight electronic databases, and gray literature from inception to August 4, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of probiotics therapy for the treatment of IBS-D were included and the quality was assessed using the risk of bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook version 5.1.0. RevMan 5.4 software was used to perform the meta-analysis on the outcomes of IBS-D symptoms, abdominal pain, quality of life, and abdominal distension. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs evaluating 943 patients were identified. Only one study had unclear risk of bias, while nine studies had a high risk of bias. The meta-analysis results showed that, compared to the placebo, probiotics therapy significantly decreased the score of IBS-D symptoms (SMD =  - 0.55, 95% CI: [- 0.83, - 0.27], P < 0.05), abdominal pain (SMD =  - 0.43, 95% CI: [- 0.57, - 0.29], P < 0.05), and abdominal distension (SMD =  - 0.45, 95%CI: [- 0.81, - 0.09], P < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in the quality of life. However, all the certainty of evidence was very low.

CONCLUSION

Very low certainty evidence showed that probiotics might be an effective treatment for improving the IBS-D symptoms, abdominal pain, and abdominal distension, in adult IBS-D patients. However, these conclusions should be supported by high-quality evidence.

Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial to Assess the Effect of Probiotics on Irritable Bowel Syndrome in Veterans With Gulf War Illness

Background

Many veterans who served in Operation Desert Storm (August 1990 to March 1991) experienced a complex of symptoms of unknown etiology called Gulf War illness (GWI), which significantly impacts the health and quality of life (QOL) and may have contributed to irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

Methods

We performed a prospective, double-blind placebocontrolled study to determine the efficacy of the multistrain De Simone Formulation probiotic containing 8 strains of bacteria on symptoms of IBS and GWI. Veterans of Operation Desert Storm who had IBS and ≥ 2 nonintestinal symptoms of GWI were included. The primary study endpoint was change in bowel symptom score. The secondary endpoints were mean change in symptoms, QOL, and extra-intestinal and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms.

Results

A total of 101 Gulf War veterans with IBS and GWI were screened at the Veteran Affairs Medical Center in Salt Lake City, Utah. The study was completed by 53 veterans; 47 (89%) were male with a mean (SD) age of 55 (8) years. The probiotic did not improve IBS symptoms or other extra-intestinal symptoms common to IBS and GWI.

Conclusions

Our study did not demonstrate statistically significant improvement in IBS symptoms or QOL after treatment with the probiotic. We also did not find any improvement in symptoms of GWI or PTSD.

Low FODMAP Diet and Probiotics in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review With Network Meta-analysis

Background: Probiotic and low fermentable oligosaccharide, disaccharide, monosaccharide, and polyol (FODMAP) diet are two commonly used management approaches for patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We aimed to evaluate the most effective combinations and components among different probiotics or low FODMAP diet through component network meta-analysis (NMA).

Methods: We searched Embase, Ovid Medline, and Web of Science from inception to 21 January 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy of probiotics and low FODMAP diet for IBS were included, with placebo, sham diet, or conventional treatments as controls. Binary outcomes were compared among treatments using the relative ratio (RR). A minimally contextualized framework recommended by the GRADE group was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence. The primary efficacy outcome was the relief of global IBS symptoms, and the secondary efficacy outcome was the reduction in IBS symptom scores or abdominal pain scores.

Key Results: We included 76 RCTs (n = 8058) after screening 1940 articles. Eight RCTs were classified as low risk of bias. Standard network meta-analysis (NMA) showed that Lactobacillus (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.22–2.48) and Bifidobacterium (RR 1.76, 95% CI 1.01–3.07) were the most effective for the primary efficacy outcome (high certainty evidence); component NMA showed that Bacillus (RR 5.67, 95% CI 1.88 to 17.08, p = 0.002) and Lactobacillus (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.91, p = 0.017) were among the most effective components. The results of standard NMA and CNMA analysis of the improvement of overall IBS symptom scores or abdominal pain scores were consistent with this finding.

Conclusion:Lactobacillus was the most effective component for the relief of IBS symptoms; Bifidobacterium and Bacillus were possibly effective and need further verification.

Systematic Review Registration: website, identifier registration number.

Probiotic therapy in patients with irritable bowel syndrome: does it have a real role?

Background

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is one of the most prevalent functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs). There is good evidence that microbiota plays a predominant role in the IBS pathophysiology. The aim of the study is to evaluate the role of probiotics in improvement of IBS symptoms via IBS-symptom severity scale (IBS-SSS Arabic version) and improvement of quality of life via irritable bowel syndrome-quality of life survey (IBS-QOL).

Results

This double-armed comparative trial was conducted on IBS patients, who fulfill ROME IV criteria and the IBS diagnostic questionnaire between August and December 2019. Ninety patients were followed up for 4 weeks from the first visit. The first group was prescribed probiotics (10 billion colony of Lactobacillus delbruekii and Lactobacillus fermentum) and itopride hcl 50 mg three times daily, while the second group received only itopride hcl 50 mg by the same dose for 4 weeks. There was a highly significant improvement in the IBS-SSS score in group 1 after 4 weeks of treatment than in group 2 (137.56±67.53 vs 258.44±34.18) (p=0.001). Also, there was a highly significant improvement in the overall QOL terms in group 1 in comparison with baseline QOL score [with overall mean score (60.64±7.77) at baseline vs (81.54±7.87) at 4 weeks (p value <0.001)].

Conclusion

Probiotics are useful for the improvement of IBS symptoms and quality of life of the studied patients. Larger multicenter studies are needed in the future.

Review Article: Current and future treatment approaches for IBS with diarrhoea (IBS-D) and IBS mixed pattern (IBS-M)

BACKGROUND

Irritable bowel syndrome-diarrhoea (IBS-D) and IBS-mixed stool pattern (IBS-M) are disorders of gut-brain interaction characterised by abdominal pain associated with diarrhoea or both diarrhoea and constipation respectively. The pathophysiology of IBS-D/M is multifactorial and not completely understood; thus, treatment is aimed at multiple mechanisms such as altering gut microbiota, visceral hypersensitivity, intestinal permeability, gut-brain interaction and psychological strategies.

AIM

The goal of this article was to provide an up-to-date review of the current evidence for both non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment options in IBS-D and IBS-M. Future treatments for IBS-D and IBS-M will also be discussed.

METHODS

Medline and Embase database searches (through April 30 2021) to identify clinical studies in subjects with IBS-D in which dietary modification, alternative treatments (probiotics, acupuncture, exercise) as well as FDA-approved medications were used.

RESULTS

Dietary modification is often the first line of therapy. Furthermore, lifestyle treatments include complementary alternative medications (CAM), probiotics and peppermint oil are useful adjuncts but have not specifically been described in IBS-D/M. Evidence strongly supports psychotherapy in the treatment of IBS. Beyond over-the counter anti-diarrhoeals, anti-spasmodics and anti-depressants, pharmacological treatment now includes treating for bile acid malabsorption and the FDA-approved medications rifaximin, eluxadoline and alosetron.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment of IBS-D/M ideally involves a multidisciplinary approach of primary care, gastroenterologist and psychologist. Treatment often involves both non-pharmacological and pharmacological therapies. Future therapies may include faecal microbial transplant, Crofelemer and serotonin antagonists, but further studies are needed.

How can probiotic improve irritable bowel syndrome symptoms?

The onset and manifestations of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is associated with several factors, and the pathophysiology involves various central and peripheral mechanisms. Most studies indicate that the management of gut microbiota could significantly affect the improvement of subjective disorders in patients with IBS. Numerous clinical trials have assessed the efficacy of probiotics for IBS with controversial conclusions. Several clinical trials have suggested that probiotics can improve global IBS symptoms, while others only improve individual IBS symptoms, such as bloating scores and abdominal pain scores. Only a few clinical trials have found no apparent effect of probiotics on IBS symptoms. Generally, probiotics appear to be safe for patients with IBS. However, the question of which probiotics should be used for certain IBS subtypes remains unresolved. In everyday practice, the dose of the recommended probiotic remains questionable, as well as how long the probiotic should be used in therapy. The use of probiotics in the M subtype and non-classified IBS is particularly problematic, in which combination therapy should be recommended due to the change in symptoms. Therefore, new approaches are needed in the design of clinical studies that should address certain subtypes of IBS.

Effect of Physical and Enzymatic Pre-Treatment on the Nutritional and Functional Properties of Fermented Beverages Enriched with Cricket Proteins

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of γ-irradiation (IR), ultrasound (US), and combined treatments of ultrasound followed by γ-irradiation (US-IR), ultrasound followed by enzymatic hydrolysis with and without centrifugation (US-E and US-EWC, respectively), and ultrasound followed by γ-irradiation and enzymatic hydrolysis (US-IRE), on the digestibility and the nutritional value of fermented beverages containing probiotics. Results showed that US (20 min), IR (3 kGy) and US-IR (tUS = 20 min, dose = 3 kGy) treatments raised protein solubility from 11.5 to 21.5, 24.3 and 29.9%, respectively. According to our results, these treatments were accompanied by the increased amount of total sulfhydryl groups, surface hydrophobicity and changes to the secondary structure of the proteins measured by Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). Fermented probiotic beverages, non-enriched (C) and enriched with untreated (Cr) or treated cricket protein with combined treatments were also evaluated for their in vitro protein digestibility. Results showed that the soluble fraction of US-IRE fermented beverage had the highest digestibility (94%) as compared to the whole fermented tested beverages. The peptides profile demonstrated that US-IRE had a low proportion of high molecular weight (MW) peptides (0.7%) and the highest proportion of low MW peptides by over 80% as compared to the other treatments.

Probiotics, Prebiotics, and Synbiotics in the Irritable Bowel Syndrome Treatment: A Review

Irritable bowel syndrome is not a life-threatening disease, yet it significantly affects the quality of life and contributes to economic loss. It is estimated that even up to 45% of the world's population can suffer from the disease. The first attempts to diagnose irritable bowel syndrome were made at the end of the 19th century; however, establishing appropriate diagnostic criteria and treatment methods is still ongoing. To date, little is known about the etiology of irritable bowel syndrome; however, growing attention is drawn to the intestinal microbiota as a factor in the disease development. For this reason, researchers have conducted many studies on therapies that modulate the microbiota, among which probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics are widely studied. To date, most studies have examined probiotics; however, there are also several studies demonstrating the efficacy of prebiotics and synbiotics. The aim of this review was to summarize findings on the usefulness of probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome.

Emerging trends and focus of human gastrointestinal microbiome research from 2010-2021: a visualized study

BACKGROUND

The gastrointestinal microbiome is an important component of the human body and is closely related to human health and disease. This study describes the hotspots of the human gastrointestinal microbiome research and its evolution in the past decade, evaluates the scientific cooperation network, and finally predicts the field's future development trend using bibliometric analysis and a visualized study.

METHODS

We searched the original articles from January 2010 to February 2021 in the Scopus database using the term "gastrointestinal microbiome" and its synonyms. CiteSpace was used to construct country and author co-occurrence map; conduct journal, citation cocitation analysis, and reference co-citation knowledge map; and form a keywords co-occurrence map, a clustering knowledge map, timeline view of keywords, and burst term map.

RESULT

A total of 4444 documents published from January 2010 to February 2021 were analysed. In approximately the past decade, the number of articles on the human gastrointestinal microbiome has increased rapidly, and the research topics focus on different populations, research methods, and detection methods. All countries and regions in the world, led by the US, are studying the human gastrointestinal microbiome, and many research teams with close cooperation have been formed. The research has been published extensively in microbiology journals and clinical medicine journals, and the highly cited articles mainly describe the relationship between gastrointestinal microorganisms and human health and disease. Regarding the research emphasis, researchers' exploration of the human gastrointestinal microbiome (2011-2013) was at a relatively macro and superficial stage and sought to determine how the gastrointestinal microbiome relates to humans. From 2014 to 2017, increasingly more studies were conducted to determine the interaction between human gastrointestinal flora and various organs and systems. In addition, researchers (2018-2021) focused on the gastrointestinal microbial community and the diversity of certain types of microbes.

CONCLUSION

Over time, the scope of the research on the clinical uses of the gastrointestinal microbiome gradually increased, and the contents were gradually deepened and developed towards a more precise level. The study of the human gastrointestinal microbiome is an ongoing research hotspot and contributes to human health.

Serological Biomarkers and Diversion Colitis: Changes after Stimulation with Probiotics

Diversion colitis is a non-specific inflammation of a defunctionalised segment of the colon after a temporary stoma has been performed. This inflammation is associated with an alteration of certain inflammatory serum markers. The aims of this study were, firstly, to evaluate the modification of inflammatory biomarkers after stimulation with probiotics prior to closure of the protective ileostomy. Secondly, to identify if a relationship could be established between the severity of diversion colitis and the alteration of inflammatory biomarkers in the blood. A prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled study was conducted. Patients who underwent surgery for colorectal carcinoma with protective ileostomy between January 2017 and December 2018 were included, pending reconstructive surgery and with diversion colitis as diagnosis. The sample was randomly divided into a group stimulated with probiotics (SG) (n = 34) and a control group (CG) (n = 35). Histological and endoscopic changes were evaluated after stimulation, after restorative surgery and during the short-term follow-up after surgery, including the correlation with pro-inflammatory biomarkers in blood. As main findings, a significant decrease in C-reactive protein (CRP), Neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR ratio), and monocyte/lymphocyte ratio (LMR ratio) was observed in the SG versus the CG with a p < 0.001. A significant increase in transferrin values and in the platelet/lymphocyte ratio (PLR) was observed in the SG versus CG after stimulation with probiotics with a p < 0.001. A normalisation of CRP and transferrin levels was observed in the third month of follow-up after closure ileostomy, and NLR, LMR and PLR ratios were equal in both groups. Decreased modified Glasgow prognostic score was found in SG compared to CG after probiotic stimulation (p < 0.001). The endoscopic and histological severity of diversion colitis is associated with a greater alteration of blood inflammatory biomarkers. The stimulation with probiotics prior to reconstructive surgery promotes an early normalization of these parameters.

The food-gut axis: lactic acid bacteria and their link to food, the gut microbiome and human health

Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are present in foods, the environment and the animal gut, although fermented foods (FFs) are recognized as the primary niche of LAB activity. Several LAB strains have been studied for their health-promoting properties and are employed as probiotics. FFs are recognized for their potential beneficial effects, which we review in this article. They are also an important source of LAB, which are ingested daily upon FF consumption. In this review, we describe the diversity of LAB and their occurrence in food as well as the gut microbiome. We discuss the opportunities to study LAB diversity and functional properties by considering the availability of both genomic and metagenomic data in public repositories, as well as the different latest computational tools for data analysis. In addition, we discuss the role of LAB as potential probiotics by reporting the prevalence of key genomic features in public genomes and by surveying the outcomes of LAB use in clinical trials involving human subjects. Finally, we highlight the need for further studies aimed at improving our knowledge of the link between LAB-fermented foods and the human gut from the perspective of health promotion.

Efficacy and Safety of Probiotics in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Irritable bowel syndrome is a functional gastrointestinal disease. Evidence has suggested that probiotics may benefit IBS symptoms. However, clinical trials remain conflicting.

Aims

To implement a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials regarding the efficacy and safety of probiotics for IBS patients.

Methods

We searched for relevant trials in Medline(1966 to Jan 2019), Embase(1974 to Jan 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials(up to Jan 2019), the ClinicalTrials.gov trials register(up to Jan 2019), and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database(1978 to Jan 2019). Risk ratio (RR) and a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI were calculated for continuous outcomes.

Results

A total of 59 studies, including 6,761 patients, were obtained. The RR of the improvement or response with probiotics versus placebo was 1.52 (95% CI 1.32-1.76), with significant heterogeneity (I² = 71%, P < 0.001). The SMD of Probiotics in improving global IBS symptoms vs. Placebo was -1.8(95% CI -0.30 to -0.06), with significant heterogeneity (I² = 65%, P < 0.001). It was impossible to draw a determinate conclusion. However, there were differences in subgroup analyses of probiotics type, dose, treatment duration, and geographic position. Probiotics seem to be safe by the analysis of adverse events(RR = 1.07; 95% CI 0.92-1.24; I² = 0, P = 0.83).

Conclusion

Probiotics are effective and safe for IBS patients. Single probiotics with a higher dose (daily dose of probiotics ≥10¹⁰) and shorter duration (< 8 weeks) seem to be a better choice, but it still needs more trials to prove it.

Impact of a Multistrain Probiotic Formulation with High Bifidobacterial Content on the Fecal Bacterial Community and Short-Chain Fatty Acid Levels of Healthy Adults

The consumption of probiotic products is continually increasing, supported by growing scientific evidence of their efficacy. Considering that probiotics may primarily affect health (either positively or negatively) through gut microbiota modulation, the first aspect that should be evaluated is their impact on the intestinal microbial ecosystem. In this study, we longitudinally analyzed the bacterial taxonomic composition and organic acid levels in four fecal samples collected over the course of four weeks from 19 healthy adults who ingested one capsule a day for two weeks of a formulation containing at least 70 billion colony-forming units, consisting of 25% lactobacilli and 75% Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis. We found that 16S rRNA gene profiling showed that probiotic intake only induced an increase in a single operational taxonomic unit ascribed to B. animalis, plausibly corresponding to the ingested bifidobacterial strain. Furthermore, liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry revealed a significant increase in the lactate and acetate/butyrate ratio and a trend toward a decrease in succinate following probiotic administration. The presented results indicate that the investigated probiotic formulation did not alter the intestinal bacterial ecosystem of healthy adults and suggest its potential ability to promote colonization resistance in the gut through a transient increase in fecal bifidobacteria, lactic acid, and the acetate/butyrate ratio.

Probiotics for the prevention of pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics alter the microbial balance commonly resulting in antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD). Probiotics may prevent AAD via providing gut barrier, restoration of the gut microflora, and other potential mechanisms of action.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objectives were to assess the efficacy and safety of probiotics (any specified strain or dose) used for the prevention of AAD in children.

SEARCH METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and the Web of Science (inception to 28 May 2018) were searched along with registers including the ISRCTN and Clinicaltrials.gov. We also searched the NICE Evidence Services database as well as reference lists from relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized, parallel, controlled trials in children (0 to 18 years) receiving antibiotics, that compare probiotics to placebo, active alternative prophylaxis, or no treatment and measure the incidence of diarrhea secondary to antibiotic use were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by two authors. Dichotomous data (incidence of AAD, adverse events) were combined using a pooled risk ratio (RR) or risk difference (RD), and continuous data (mean duration of diarrhea) as mean difference (MD), along with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). We calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) where appropriate. For studies reporting on microbiome characteristics using heterogeneous outcomes, we describe the results narratively. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-three studies (6352 participants) were included. Probiotics assessed included Bacillus spp., Bifidobacterium spp., Clostridium butyricum, Lactobacilli spp., Lactococcus spp., Leuconostoc cremoris, Saccharomyces spp., orStreptococcus spp., alone or in combination. The risk of bias was determined to be high in 20 studies and low in 13 studies. Complete case (patients who did not complete the studies were not included in the analysis) results from 33 trials reporting on the incidence of diarrhea show a precise benefit from probiotics compared to active, placebo or no treatment control.After 5 days to 12 weeks of follow-up, the incidence of AAD in the probiotic group was 8% (259/3232) compared to 19% (598/3120) in the control group (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.56; I² = 57%, 6352 participants; NNTB 9, 95% CI 7 to 13; moderate certainty evidence). Nineteen studies had loss to follow-up ranging from 1% to 46%. After making assumptions for those lost, the observed benefit was still statistically significant using an extreme plausible intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, wherein the incidence of AAD in the probiotic group was 12% (436/3551) compared to 19% (664/3468) in the control group (7019 participants; RR 0.61; 95% CI 0.49 to 0.77; P <0.00001; I² = 70%). An a priori available case subgroup analysis exploring heterogeneity indicated that high dose (≥ 5 billion CFUs per day) is more effective than low probiotic dose (< 5 billion CFUs per day), interaction P value = 0.01. For the high dose studies the incidence of AAD in the probiotic group was 8% (162/2029) compared to 23% (462/2009) in the control group (4038 participants; RR 0.37; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.46; P = 0.06; moderate certainty evidence). For the low dose studies the incidence of AAD in the probiotic group was 8% (97/1155) compared to 13% (133/1059) in the control group (2214 participants; RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.46 to 1.01; P = 0.02). Again, assumptions for loss to follow-up using an extreme plausible ITT analysis was statistically significant. For high dose studies the incidence of AAD in the probiotic group was 13% (278/2218) compared to 23% (503/2207) in control group (4425 participants; RR 0.54; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.70; P <0.00001; I² = 68%; moderate certainty evidence).None of the 24 trials (4415 participants) that reported on adverse events reported any serious adverse events attributable to probiotics. Adverse event rates were low. After 5 days to 4 weeks follow-up, 4% (86/2229) of probiotics participants had an adverse event compared to 6% (121/2186) of control participants (RD 0.00; 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; P < 0.00001; I² = 75%; low certainty evidence). Common adverse events included rash, nausea, gas, flatulence, abdominal bloating, and constipation.After 10 days to 12 weeks of follow-up, eight studies recorded data on our secondary outcome, the mean duration of diarrhea; with probiotics reducing diarrhea duration by almost one day (MD -0.91; 95% CI -1.38 to -0.44; P <0.00001; low certainty evidence). One study reported on microbiome characteristics, reporting no difference in changes with concurrent antibiotic and probiotic use.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The overall evidence suggests a moderate protective effect of probiotics for preventing AAD (NNTB 9, 95% CI 7 to 13). Using five criteria to evaluate the credibility of the subgroup analysis on probiotic dose, the results indicate the subgroup effect based on high dose probiotics (≥ 5 billion CFUs per day) was credible. Based on high-dose probiotics, the NNTB to prevent one case of diarrhea is 6 (95% CI 5 to 9). The overall certainty of the evidence for the primary endpoint, incidence of AAD based on high dose probiotics was moderate due to the minor issues with risk of bias and inconsistency related to a diversity of probiotic agents used. Evidence also suggests that probiotics may moderately reduce the duration of diarrhea, a reduction by almost one day. The benefit of high dose probiotics (e.g. Lactobacillus rhamnosus orSaccharomyces boulardii) needs to be confirmed by a large well-designed multi-centered randomized trial. It is premature to draw firm conclusions about the efficacy and safety of 'other' probiotic agents as an adjunct to antibiotics in children. Adverse event rates were low and no serious adverse events were attributable to probiotics. Although no serious adverse events were observed among inpatient and outpatient children, including small studies conducted in the intensive care unit and in the neonatal unit, observational studies not included in this review have reported serious adverse events in severely debilitated or immuno-compromised children with underlying risk factors including central venous catheter use and disorders associated with bacterial/fungal translocation.

Refers to: Paul Enck. Not more, but less studies are warranted-If you take your meta-analysis seriously

This submission is in reply to a letter by Dr. Paul Enck regarding our recent conclusions regarding the clinical efficacy of patented probiotic, VSL#3, in Irritable Bowel Syndrome.

Systematic review and meta-analysis: Efficacy of patented probiotic, VSL#3, in irritable bowel syndrome

BACKGROUND

VSL#3 is a patented probiotic for which several clinical trials suggest benefits on motor function, bloating, and symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

OBJECTIVES

To quantify effects of VSL#3 on abdominal pain, stool consistency, overall response, abdominal bloating, and quality of life (QOL) in IBS through meta-analysis.

METHODS

MEDLINE (OvidSP and PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched up to May 2017. Using a fixed effects model, we pooled data from intention-to-treat analyses of randomized trials (RCTs) comparing VSL#3 to placebo in IBS. Data were reported as relative risk (RR), overall mean difference (MD), or standardized MD (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Quality of evidence was rated using the GRADE approach.

KEY RESULTS

Among 236 citations, 5 RCTs (243 patients) were included. No significant differences were observed for abdominal pain (SMD = -0.03; 95% CI -0.29 to 0.22), bloating (SMD = -0.15; 95% CI -0.40 to 0.11), proportion of bowel movements with normal consistency (overall MD = 0; 95% CI -0.09 to 0.08), or IBS-QOL (SMD = 0.08; 95% CI -0.22 to 0.39). VSL#3 was associated with a nearly statistically significant increase in overall response (RR = 1.39; 95% CI 0.99-1.98).

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, there was a trend toward improvement in overall response with VSL#3, but no clear evidence effectiveness for IBS. However, the number and sample sizes of the trials are small and the overall quality of evidence for 3 of the 5 outcomes was low. Larger trials evaluating validated endpoints in well-defined IBS patients are warranted.

Therapeutic Microbiology: The Role of Bifidobacterium breve as Food Supplement for the Prevention/Treatment of Paediatric Diseases

The human intestinal microbiota, establishing a symbiotic relationship with the host, plays a significant role for human health. It is also well known that a disease status is frequently characterized by a dysbiotic condition of the gut microbiota. A probiotic treatment can represent an alternative therapy for enteric disorders and human pathologies not apparently linked to the gastrointestinal tract. Among bifidobacteria, strains of the species Bifidobacterium breve are widely used in paediatrics. B. breve is the dominant species in the gut of breast-fed infants and it has also been isolated from human milk. It has antimicrobial activity against human pathogens, it does not possess transmissible antibiotic resistance traits, it is not cytotoxic and it has immuno-stimulating abilities. This review describes the applications of B. breve strains mainly for the prevention/treatment of paediatric pathologies. The target pathologies range from widespread gut diseases, including diarrhoea and infant colics, to celiac disease, obesity, allergic and neurological disorders. Moreover, B. breve strains are used for the prevention of side infections in preterm newborns and during antibiotic treatments or chemotherapy. With this documentation, we hope to increase knowledge on this species to boost the interest in the emerging discipline known as "therapeutic microbiology".

Systematic review with meta-analysis: the efficacy of prebiotics, probiotics, synbiotics and antibiotics in irritable bowel syndrome

BACKGROUND

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic functional bowel disorder. Disturbances in the gastrointestinal microbiome may be involved in its aetiology.

AIM

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the efficacy of prebiotics, probiotics, synbiotics and antibiotics in IBS.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched (up to July 2017). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults with IBS, comparing prebiotics, probiotics, synbiotics or antibiotics with placebo or no therapy were eligible. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain a relative risk (RR) of remaining symptomatic after therapy, with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Continuous data were pooled using a standardised mean difference with a 95% CI.

RESULTS

The search identified 4017 citations. Data for prebiotics and synbiotics were sparse. Fifty-three RCTs of probiotics, involving 5545 patients, were eligible. Particular combinations of probiotics, or specific species and strains, appeared to have beneficial effects on global IBS symptoms and abdominal pain, but it was not possible to draw definitive conclusions about their efficacy. There were five trials of similar design that used rifaximin in non-constipated IBS patients, which was more effective than placebo (RR of symptoms persisting = 0.84; 95% CI 0.79-0.90). Adverse events were no more common with probiotics or antibiotics.

CONCLUSIONS

Which particular combination, species or strains of probiotics are effective for IBS remains, for the most part, unclear. Rifaximin has modest efficacy in improving symptoms in non-constipated IBS.

A Randomized Clinical Trial of Synbiotics in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Dose-Dependent Effects on Gastrointestinal Symptoms and Fatigue

Background

This double-blind, randomized controlled design study aimed to assess the dose-dependent effects of synbiotics on gastrointestinal symptoms of and fatigue in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

Methods

Thirty subjects with IBS were randomly assigned into the following three groups and received 2 capsules a day for 8 weeks: (1) high-dose (2 capsules of synbiotics); (2) low-dose (1 capsule of synbiotics and 1 capsule of placebo); and (3) placebo (2 capsules of placebo). At baseline and 8 weeks, they completed the study questionnaires.

Results

Two subjects in the high-dose group were lost to follow-up, leaving a total of 28 patients for the analysis. After 8 weeks, abdominal discomfort, abdominal bloating, frequency of formed stool, fatigue Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory were significantly different among the groups (P=0.002, 0.006, 0.007, 0.028, and 0.041, respectively, by Kruskal-Wallis test). However, only abdominal discomfort, abdominal bloating, frequency of formed stool, and fatigue VAS were significantly improved in the high-dose group compared with those in the placebo group (P=0.002, 0.003, 0.002, and 0.013, respectively) by Mann-Whitney test with Bonferroni correction. No adverse drug reactions were reported.

Conclusion

High-dose synbiotics were superior to placebo in improving bowel symptoms and fatigue of IBS patients, suggesting that synbiotic dosage plays an important role in the treatment of IBS.

Visceral pain: gut microbiota, a new hope?

BACKGROUND

Visceral pain is a complex and heterogeneous disorder, which can range from the mild discomfort of indigestion to the agonizing pain of renal colic. Regulation of visceral pain involves the spinal cord as well as higher order brain structures. Recent findings have linked the microbiota to gastrointestinal disorders characterized by abdominal pain suggesting the ability of microbes to modulate visceral hypersensitivity and nociception to pain.

MAIN BODY

In this review we describe the neuroanatomical basis of visceral pain signaling and the existing evidence of its manipulation exerted by the gut microbiota. We included an updated overview of the potential therapeutic effects of dietary intervention, specifically probiotics and prebiotics, in alleviating hypersensitivity to visceral pain stimuli.

CONCLUSIONS

The gut microbiota dramatically impacts normal visceral pain sensation and affects the mechanisms mediating visceral nociception. Furthermore, manipulation of the gut microbiota using prebiotics and probiotics plays a potential role in the regulation of visceral pain disorders.

Guidelines on the management of irritable bowel syndrome: In memory of Professor Witold Bartnik

These guidelines constitute an update of the previous "Recommendations on the management of irritable bowel syndrome" issued in 2008. They have been developed by a Task Force organized by the Governing Board of the Polish Society of Gastroenterology. They discuss, with particular emphasis on new scientific data covering papers published since 2008, the aetiology, epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnostic principles and criteria for the diagnosis, and recommendations for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The English-language acronym for the syndrome (IBS) has become popular in medical and popular scientific language. It is also widely recognized by patients who identify with this diagnosis. Therefore, in the discussed guidelines, this is what we will use.

The Role of Prebiotics and Probiotics in Gastrointestinal Disease

With the advent of the scientific realization that the microbiota of the gastrointestinal tract was more than the cells that exist in the body, the full importance of prebiotics and probiotics has come forth. The importance has been stressed and is available in the new textbook entitled, "The Microbiota in Gastrointestinal Pathophysiology: Implication for Human Health, Prebiotics, Probiotics and Dysbiosis." There is enough evidence now published in the literature so that the scientific world now believes that prebiotics and probiotics are important in gastrointestinal disease.

Targeting the Microbiota, from Irritable Bowel Syndrome to Mood Disorders: Focus on Probiotics and Prebiotics

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The crosstalk between the gut and the brain has revealed a complex communication system responsible for maintaining a proper gastrointestinal homeostasis as well as affect emotional mood and cognitive functions. Recent research has revealed that beneficial manipulation of the microbiota by probiotics and prebiotics represent an emerging and novel strategy for the treatment of a large spectrum of diseases ranging from visceral pain to mood disorders. The review critically evaluates current knowledge of the effects exerted by both probiotics and prebiotics in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and mood disorders such as anxiety and depression.

RECENT FINDINGS

Relevant literature was identified through a search of MEDLINE via PubMed using the following words, "probiotics", "prebiotics", "microbiota", and "gut-brain axis" in combination with "stress", "depression", "IBS", and "anxiety". A number of trials have shown efficacy of probiotics and prebiotics in ameliorating both IBS related symptoms and emotional states. However, limitations have been found especially due to the small number of clinical studies, studies design, patient sample size, and placebo effect.

SUMMARY

Nonetheless, current finding supports the view that beneficial manipulation of the microbiota through both probiotics and prebiotics intake represents a novel attractive strategy to treat gut-brain axis disorders such as IBS and depression.

Medicinal Foods for Functional GI Disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Over the past 10 years, there has been a dramatic increase in basic and clinical research involving functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs). New diagnostic and biomarker procedures are helping to identify physiologic disruptions associated with FGIDs on cellular and molecular levels. Simultaneously, clinicians are using new approaches to help manage patients with FGIDs. Among these, an important component of care has been the use of medical foods. These include probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, peppermint oil, caraway oil, curcumin, bovine immunoglobulin and many others.

RECENT FINDINGS

The putative effects of different medical foods make these therapies attractive for the management of FGIDs. These include effects on several pathophysiological mechanisms such as anti-inflammatory, smooth muscle relaxation, analgesia, mitigation of gut barrier dysfunction, and stimulation or inhibition of gastrointestinal receptors. Recent research has also demonstrated the efficacy of medical food products such as peppermint oil and serum-derived bovine immunoglobulin for the management of irritable bowel syndrome. Older data supports the probiotic VSL#3 and Bifidobacterium species. For functional dyspepsia, positive effects have been observed with the combination of caraway seed oil and peppermint oil as well as with STW-5, a botanical combination preparation, although robust RCTs are lacking. With advancing knowledge regarding the pathogenesis of FGIDs, it is likely that the compounds available in the medical food category will increase dramatically, and they could play an important role in the management of several common and bothersome gastrointestinal conditions in the future.

Modulation of the gut microbiota: a focus on treatments for irritable bowel syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), which is characterized by recurrent abdominal pain and disordered bowel habits, is one of the most common functional bowel disorders. IBS is a substantial burden on both patient health-related quality of life and healthcare costs. Several pathophysiologic mechanisms have been postulated for the occurrence of IBS, including altered gastrointestinal motility, visceral hypersensitivity, changes in gut permeability, immune activation, gut-brain dysregulation, central nervous system dysfunction, and changes in the gut microbiota. Of note, both qualitative and quantitative differences have been observed in the gut microbiota of a population with IBS versus a healthy population. Because of the substantial interest in the gut microbiota and its role as a therapeutic target in IBS, this article provides an overview of specific interventions with the potential to modulate the gut microbiota in IBS, including elimination diets, prebiotics, probiotics, synbiotics, and nonsystemic antibiotics. Although probiotics and synbiotics are generally well tolerated, differences in the composition and concentration of different bacterial species and inclusion or exclusion of prebiotic components varies widely across studies and has prevented strong recommendations on their use in IBS. For nonsystemic antibiotics, rifaximin is indicated in the United States for the treatment of IBS with diarrhea in adults and has been shown to be efficacious and well tolerated in well-designed clinical trials. Overall, more consistent evidence is needed regarding the efficacy and safety of elimination diets, prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics for the treatment of patients with IBS. Furthermore, additional well-designed studies are needed that examine alterations in the gut microbiota that occur with these interventions and their potential associations with clinical symptoms of IBS.

A double-blind, placebo-controlled study to assess the effect of a probiotic mixture on symptoms and inflammatory markers in women with diarrhea-predominant IBS

BACKGROUND

Micro-inflammation is considered an element in the pathogenesis of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). High-sensitivity C reactive protein (hs-CRP) was previously shown to be higher in IBS compared to healthy controls, albeit within the normal range. Since probiotics may suppress micro-inflammation in the gut, we tested if they reduce symptoms and inflammatory markers (hs-CRP and fecal calprotectin (FC) in diarrhea-predominant IBS (IBS-D). The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and laboratory effects of BIO-25, a multispecies probiotic, in women with IBS-D.

METHODS

A double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Following a 2-week run-in, eligible women were assigned at random to a probiotic capsule or an indistinguishable placebo, twice daily for 8 weeks. IBS symptoms and stool consistency were rated daily by Visual Analogue Scales (VAS) and the Bristol Stool Scale (BSS). High-sensitivity C reactive protein was tested at baseline, 4 and 8 weeks. FC was tested at baseline and 8 weeks.

KEY RESULTS

One hundred and seventy-two IBS-D patients were recruited and 107 eligible patients were allocated to the intervention (n=54) or placebo (n=53) group. All symptoms improved in both groups with no significant difference between them in symptom improvement, hs-CRP or FC levels.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

An 8-week treatment with BIO-25 improved symptoms in women with IBS-D, but was not superior to placebo. This rigorously designed and executed study supports the findings of other studies that did not demonstrate superiority of probiotics over placebo in IBS. High quality clinical studies are necessary to examine the efficacy of other specific probiotics in IBS-D patients since data are still conflicting.

Therapeutic Modulation of Gut Microbiota in Functional Bowel Disorders

Functional bowel disorders (FBDs) are functional gastrointestinal disorders with symptoms attributable to the middle or lower gastrointestinal tract. These include irritable bowel syndrome, functional bloating, functional constipation, functional diarrhea, and unspecified FBD. Increasing evidence has emerged of late that intestinal microbiota is involved in the pathogenesis of FBDs. In this review, the therapeutic benefits and future perspectives of the currently available strategies for modifying the gut microbiota in FBDs are described, focusing primarily on irritable bowel syndrome and functional constipation.

The Role of the Gastrointestinal Microbiota in Visceral Pain

A growing body of preclinical and clinical evidence supports a relationship between the complexity and diversity of the microorganisms that inhabit our gut (human gastrointestinal microbiota) and health status. Under normal homeostatic conditions this microbial population helps maintain intestinal peristalsis, mucosal integrity, pH balance, immune priming and protection against invading pathogens. Furthermore, these microbes can influence centrally regulated emotional behaviour through mechanisms including microbially derived bioactive molecules (amino acid metabolites, short-chain fatty acids, neuropeptides and neurotransmitters), mucosal immune and enteroendocrine cell activation, as well as vagal nerve stimulation.The microbiota-gut-brain axis comprises a dynamic matrix of tissues and organs including the brain, autonomic nervous system, glands, gut, immune cells and gastrointestinal microbiota that communicate in a complex multidirectional manner to maintain homeostasis and resist perturbation to the system. Changes to the microbial environment, as a consequence of illness, stress or injury, can lead to a broad spectrum of physiological and behavioural effects locally including a decrease in gut barrier integrity, altered gut motility, inflammatory mediator release as well as nociceptive and distension receptor sensitisation. Centrally mediated events including hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, neuroinflammatory events and neurotransmitter systems are concomitantly altered. Thus, both central and peripheral pathways associated with pain manifestation and perception are altered as a consequence of the microbiota-gut-brain axis imbalance.In this chapter the involvement of the gastrointestinal microbiota in visceral pain is reviewed. We focus on the anatomical and physiological nodes whereby microbiota may be mediating pain response, and address the potential for manipulating gastrointestinal microbiota as a therapeutic target for visceral pain.

Effects of probiotic type, dose and treatment duration on irritable bowel syndrome diagnosed by Rome III criteria: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is one of the most common functional gastroenterological diseases, affecting 11.2 % of people worldwide. Previous studies have shown that probiotic treatment may benefit IBS patients. However, the effect of probiotics and the appropriate type, dose, and treatment duration for IBS are still unclear. The aim of the current study was to assess the efficacy of different probiotic types, doses and treatment durations in IBS patients diagnosed by Rome III criteria via a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to October 2015 were searched. RCTs including comparisons between the effects of probiotics and placebo on IBS patients diagnosed by Rome III criteria were eligible. Dichotomous data were pooled to obtain the relative risk (RR) with a 95 % confidence interval (CI), whereas continuous data were pooled using a standardized mean difference (SMD) with a 95 % CI.

RESULTS

Twenty-one RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. Probiotic therapy was associated with more improvement than placebo administration in overall symptom response (RR: 1.82, 95 % CI 1.27 to 2.60) and quality of life (QoL) (SMD: 0.29, 95 % CI 0.08 to 0.50), but not in individual IBS symptoms. Single probiotics, a low dose, and a short treatment duration were more effective with respect to overall symptom response and QoL. No differences were detected in individual IBS symptoms in the subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSION

Probiotics are an effective pharmacological therapy in IBS patients. Single probiotics at a low dose and with a short treatment duration appear to be more effective in improving overall symptom response and QoL, but more evidence for these effects is still needed.

Complex Relationships Between Food, Diet, and the Microbiome

Diet is a risk factor in several medically important disease states, including obesity, celiac disease, and functional gastrointestinal disorders. Modification of diet can prevent, treat, or alleviate some of the symptoms associated with these diseases and improve general health. It is important to provide patients with simple dietary recommendations to increase the probability of successful implementation. These recommendations include increasing vegetable, fruit, and fiber intake, consuming lean protein sources to enhance satiety, avoiding or severely limiting highly processed foods, and reducing portion sizes for overweight and obese patients.

Gut microbiota role in irritable bowel syndrome: New therapeutic strategies

In the last decade the impressive expansion of our knowledge of the vast microbial community that resides in the human intestine, the gut microbiota, has provided support to the concept that a disturbed intestinal ecology might promote development and maintenance of symptoms in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). As a correlate, manipulation of gut microbiota represents a new strategy for the treatment of this multifactorial disease. A number of attempts have been made to modulate the gut bacterial composition, following the idea that expansion of bacterial species considered as beneficial (Lactobacilli and Bifidobacteria) associated with the reduction of those considered harmful (Clostridium, Escherichia coli, Salmonella, Shigella and Pseudomonas) should attenuate IBS symptoms. In this conceptual framework, probiotics appear an attractive option in terms of both efficacy and safety, while prebiotics, synbiotics and antibiotics still need confirmation. Fecal transplant is an old treatment translated from the cure of intestinal infective pathologies that has recently gained a new life as therapeutic option for those patients with a disturbed gut ecosystem, but data on IBS are scanty and randomized, placebo-controlled studies are required.

Stress and the Microbiota-Gut-Brain Axis in Visceral Pain: Relevance to Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Visceral pain is a global term used to describe pain originating from the internal organs of the body, which affects a significant proportion of the population and is a common feature of functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) such as irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). While IBS is multifactorial, with no single etiology to completely explain the disorder, many patients also experience comorbid behavioral disorders, such as anxiety or depression; thus, IBS is described as a disorder of the gut-brain axis. Stress is implicated in the development and exacerbation of visceral pain disorders. Chronic stress can modify central pain circuitry, as well as change motility and permeability throughout the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. More recently, the role of the gut microbiota in the bidirectional communication along the gut-brain axis, and subsequent changes in behavior, has emerged. Thus, stress and the gut microbiota can interact through complementary or opposing factors to influence visceral nociceptive behaviors. This review will highlight the evidence by which stress and the gut microbiota interact in the regulation of visceral nociception. We will focus on the influence of stress on the microbiota and the mechanisms by which microbiota can affect the stress response and behavioral outcomes with an emphasis on visceral pain.

Probiotics in functional bowel disorders

Functional bowel disorders (FBDs) are the most common gastrointestinal (GI) disorders seen by gastroenterologists and primary care physicians. The disorders affect patients functioning and quality of life (QOL) and are associated with significant healthcare burden. The current theory regarding the development of FBDs suggests brain-gut axis dysfunctions associated abnormal GI motility and sensation. Recent data suggest that alterations in the intestinal microbiota may have a role in the pathogenesis of FBDs; or at least have the potential to affect intestinal functions that are thought to be relevant to the development of functional GI symptoms. This has led to growing interest of healthcare providers and patients in targeting the intestinal microbiota for the treatment of FBDs. In this article we discuss the potential role probiotic interventions in the treatment of FBDs. We review the evidence from pre-clinical and clinical studies and discuss the current recommendations for the use of probiotics for FBDs in clinical practice.

Probiotics for the prevention of pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics are frequently prescribed in children. They alter the microbial balance within the gastrointestinal tract, commonly resulting in antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD). Probiotics may prevent AAD via restoration of the gut microflora.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objectives were to assess the efficacy and safety of probiotics (any specified strain or dose) used for the prevention of AAD in children.

SEARCH METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, AMED, and the Web of Science (inception to November 2014) were searched along with specialized registers including the Cochrane IBD/FBD review group, CISCOM (Centralized Information Service for Complementary Medicine), NHS Evidence, the International Bibliographic Information on Dietary Supplements as well as trial registries. Letters were sent to authors of included trials, nutraceutical and pharmaceutical companies, and experts in the field requesting additional information on ongoing or unpublished trials. Conference proceedings, dissertation abstracts, and reference lists from included and relevant articles were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized, parallel, controlled trials in children (0 to 18 years) receiving antibiotics, that compare probiotics to placebo, active alternative prophylaxis, or no treatment and measure the incidence of diarrhea secondary to antibiotic use were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Study selection, data extraction as well as methodological quality assessment using the risk of bias instrument was conducted independently and in duplicate by two authors. Dichotomous data (incidence of diarrhea, adverse events) were combined using a pooled risk ratio (RR) or risk difference (RD), and continuous data (mean duration of diarrhea, mean daily stool frequency) as mean difference (MD), along with their corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). For overall pooled results on the incidence of diarrhea, sensitivity analyses included available case versus extreme-plausible analyses and random- versus fixed-effect models. To explore possible explanations for heterogeneity, a priori subgroup analysis were conducted on probiotic strain, dose, definition of antibiotic-associated diarrhea, as well as risk of bias. We also conducted post hoc subgroup analyses by patient diagnosis, single versus multi-strain, industry sponsorship, and inpatient status. The overall quality of the evidence supporting the outcomes was evaluated using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-three studies (3938 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Trials included treatment with either Bacillus spp., Bifidobacterium spp., Clostridium butyricum, Lactobacilli spp., Lactococcus spp., Leuconostoc cremoris, Saccharomyces spp., orStreptococcus spp., alone or in combination. Eleven studies used a single strain probiotic, four combined two probiotic strains, three combined three probiotic strains, one combined four probiotic strains, two combined seven probiotic strains, one included ten probiotic strains, and one study included two probiotic arms that used three and two strains respectively. The risk of bias was determined to be high or unclear in 13 studies and low in 10 studies. Available case (patients who did not complete the studies were not included in the analysis) results from 22/23 trials reporting on the incidence of diarrhea show a precise benefit from probiotics compared to active, placebo or no treatment control. The incidence of AAD in the probiotic group was 8% (163/1992) compared to 19% (364/1906) in the control group (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.61; I(2) = 55%, 3898 participants). A GRADE analysis indicated that the overall quality of the evidence for this outcome was moderate. This benefit remained statistically significant in an extreme plausible (60% of children loss to follow-up in probiotic group and 20% loss to follow-up in the control group had diarrhea) sensitivity analysis, where the incidence of AAD in the probiotic group was 14% (330/2294) compared to 19% (426/2235) in the control group (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.89; I(2) = 63%, 4529 participants). None of the 16 trials (n = 2455) that reported on adverse events documented any serious adverse events attributable to probiotics. Meta-analysis excluded all but an extremely small non-significant difference in adverse events between treatment and control (RD 0.00; 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01). The majority of adverse events were in placebo, standard care or no treatment group. Adverse events reported in the studies include rash, nausea, gas, flatulence, abdominal bloating, abdominal pain, vomiting, increased phlegm, chest pain, constipation, taste disturbance, and low appetite.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate quality evidence suggests a protective effect of probiotics in preventing AAD. Our pooled estimate suggests a precise (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.35 to 0.61) probiotic effect with a NNT of 10. Among the various probiotics evaluated, Lactobacillus rhamnosus or Saccharomyces boulardii at 5 to 40 billion colony forming units/day may be appropriate given the modest NNT and the likelihood that adverse events are very rare. It is premature to draw conclusions about the efficacy and safety of other probiotic agents for pediatric AAD. Although no serious adverse events were observed among otherwise healthy children, serious adverse events have been observed in severely debilitated or immuno-compromised children with underlying risk factors including central venous catheter use and disorders associated with bacterial/fungal translocation. Until further research has been conducted, probiotic use should be avoided in pediatric populations at risk for adverse events. Future trials would benefit from a standard and valid outcomes to measure AAD.

Probiotics Improve Inflammation-Associated Sickness Behavior by Altering Communication between the Peripheral Immune System and the Brain

Patients with systemic inflammatory diseases (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, chronic liver disease) commonly develop debilitating symptoms (i.e., sickness behaviors) that arise from changes in brain function. The microbiota-gut-brain axis alters brain function and probiotic ingestion can influence behavior. However, how probiotics do this remains unclear. We have previously described a novel periphery-to-brain communication pathway in the setting of peripheral organ inflammation whereby monocytes are recruited to the brain in response to systemic TNF-α signaling, leading to microglial activation and subsequently driving sickness behavior development. Therefore, we investigated whether probiotic ingestion (i.e., probiotic mixture VSL#3) alters this periphery-to-brain communication pathway, thereby reducing subsequent sickness behavior development. Using a well characterized mouse model of liver inflammation, we now show that probiotic (VSL#3) treatment attenuates sickness behavior development in mice with liver inflammation without affecting disease severity, gut microbiota composition, or gut permeability. Attenuation of sickness behavior development was associated with reductions in microglial activation and cerebral monocyte infiltration. These events were paralleled by changes in markers of systemic immune activation, including decreased circulating TNF-α levels. Our observations highlight a novel pathway through which probiotics mediate cerebral changes and alter behavior. These findings allow for the potential development of novel therapeutic interventions targeted at the gut microbiome to treat inflammation-associated sickness behaviors in patients with systemic inflammatory diseases.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

This research shows that probiotics, when eaten, can improve the abnormal behaviors (including social withdrawal and immobility) that are commonly associated with inflammation. Probiotics are able to cause this effect within the body by changing how the immune system signals the brain to alter brain function. These findings broaden our understanding of how probiotics may beneficially affect brain function in the context of inflammation occurring within the body and may open potential new therapeutic alternatives for the treatment of these alterations in behavior that can greatly affect patient quality of life.

Probiotic Therapy of the Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Why Is the Evidence Still Poor and What Can Be Done About It?

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Despite numerous randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses, there is no increased evidence for the efficacy of probiotics in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We review this evidence, identify and analyse the reasons for this lack of evidence and propose methodological improvements for future studies.

METHODS

Based on a literature search, we identified 56 papers that matched the purpose of our analyses. Twenty-seven studies used multi-species bacterial preparations and 29 used single-strain probiotics. They were analysed regarding patients included, treatment duration, probiotic dosage, and outcome measures.

RESULTS

Trials in both groups suffered from heterogeneity with respect to probiotic concentration, duration of treatment, and other methodological issues (crossover design and underpowered studies). This heterogeneity did not allow the application of a meta-analytic approach and a systematic review was therefore performed instead. Multi-strain preparations combined 2 to 8 different bacterial subspecies, mostly lactobacilli or bifidobacteria, and used variable lengths of treatments. Overall, more than 50% of trials presented negative outcomes. The majority of the single-strain probiotic trials employing lactobacilli or Saccharomyces were negative, whereas trials employing bifidobacteria showed positive results.

CONCLUSIONS

The heterogeneity of the studies of probiotics in IBS questions the value of meta-analyses. The use of different bacterial strains and different mixtures of these strains, as well as different dosages, are the main contributors to this heterogeneity. Current data provides limited evidence for the efficacy of a small number of single-strain probiotics in IBS (mostly bifidobacteria) and sound studies following strict trial guidelines (Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency guidelines for clinical trials) are needed. We summarised and proposed some methodological issues for future studies in the field.

Altered gut microbial energy and metabolism in children with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease

Obesity is becoming the new pediatric epidemic. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is frequently associated with obesity and has become the most common cause of pediatric liver disease. The gut microbiome is the major metabolic organ and determines how calories are processed, serving as a caloric gate and contributing towards the pathogenesis of NAFLD. The goal of this study is to examine gut microbial profiles in children with NAFLD using phylogenetic, metabolomic, metagenomic and proteomic approaches. Fecal samples were obtained from obese children with or without NAFLD and healthy lean children. Stool specimens were subjected to 16S rRNA gene microarray, shotgun sequencing, mass spectroscopy for proteomics and NMR spectroscopy for metabolite analysis. Children with NAFLD had more abundant Gammaproteobacteria and Prevotella and significantly higher levels of ethanol, with differential effects on short chain fatty acids. This group also had increased genomic and protein abundance for energy production with a reduction in carbohydrate and amino acid metabolism and urea cycle and urea transport systems. The metaproteome and metagenome showed similar findings. The gut microbiome in pediatric NAFLD is distinct from lean healthy children with more alcohol production and pathways allocated to energy metabolism over carbohydrate and amino acid metabolism, which would contribute to development of disease.

Impact of personalized diet and probiotic supplementation on inflammation, nutritional parameters and intestinal microbiota - The "RISTOMED project": Randomized controlled trial in healthy older people

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of a personalized diet, with or without addition of VSL#3 preparation, on biomarkers of inflammation, nutrition, oxidative stress and intestinal microbiota in 62 healthy persons aged 65-85 years.

DESIGN

Open label, randomized, multicenter study.

PRIMARY ENDPOINT

High-sensitivity C-reactive protein.

SETTING

Community.

INTERVENTIONS

Eight week web-based dietary advice (RISTOMED platform) alone or with supplementation of VSL#3 (2 capsules per day). The RISTOMED diet was optimized to reduce inflammation and oxidative stress.

MEASUREMENTS

Blood and stool samples were collected on days 1 and 56.

RESULTS

Diet alone reduced ESR (p = 0.02), plasma levels of cholesterol (p < 0.01) and glucose (p = 0.03). Addition of VSL#3 reduced ESR (p = 0.05) and improved folate (p = 0.007), vitamin B12 (p = 0.001) and homocysteine (p < 0.001) plasma levels. Neither intervention demonstrated any further effects on inflammation. Subgroup analysis showed 40 participants without signs of low-grade inflammation (hsCRP<3 mg/l, subgroup 1) and 21 participants with low-grade inflammation at baseline (hsCRP≥3 mg/l, subgroup 2). In subgroup 2 addition of VSL#3 increased bifidobacteria (p = 0.005) in more participants and improved both folate (p = 0.015) and vitamin B12 (p = 0.035) levels compared with subgroup 1. The increases were positively correlated to the change in the bifidobacteria concentration for folate (p = 0.023) and vitamin B12 (p = 0.001). As expected change in homocysteine correlated negatively to change in folate (r = -0.629, p = 0.002) and vitamin B12 (r = -0.482, p = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of VSL#3 increased bifidobacteria and supported adequate folate and vitamin B12 concentrations in subjects with low-grade inflammation. Decrease in homocysteine with VSL#3 was clinically relevant. suggesting protective potentials for aging-associated conditions, e.g. cardiovascular or neurological diseases. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01069445-NCT01179789.

Efficacy of prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics in irritable bowel syndrome and chronic idiopathic constipation: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) are functional bowel disorders. Evidence suggests that disturbance in the gastrointestinal microbiota may be implicated in both conditions. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the efficacy of prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics in IBS and CIC.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched (up to December 2013). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults with IBS or CIC, which compared prebiotics, probiotics, or synbiotics with placebo or no therapy, were eligible. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain a relative risk (RR) of remaining symptomatic after therapy, with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Continuous data were pooled using a standardized or weighted mean difference with a 95% CI.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 3,216 citations. Forty-three RCTs were eligible for inclusion. The RR of IBS symptoms persisting with probiotics vs. placebo was 0.79 (95% CI 0.70-0.89). Probiotics had beneficial effects on global IBS, abdominal pain, bloating, and flatulence scores. Data for prebiotics and synbiotics in IBS were sparse. Probiotics appeared to have beneficial effects in CIC (mean increase in number of stools per week=1.49; 95% CI=1.02-1.96), but there were only two RCTs. Synbiotics also appeared beneficial (RR of failure to respond to therapy=0.78; 95% CI 0.67-0.92). Again, trials for prebiotics were few in number, and no definite conclusions could be drawn.

CONCLUSIONS

Probiotics are effective treatments for IBS, although which individual species and strains are the most beneficial remains unclear. Further evidence is required before the role of prebiotics or synbiotics in IBS is known. The efficacy of all three therapies in CIC is also uncertain.