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

The effectiveness of probiotics as an adjunct therapy in patients under mechanical ventilation: an umbrella systematic review and meta-analysis

The literature regarding the role of probiotics in critically ill patients who have undergone mechanical ventilation (MV) is unclear; therefore, this umbrella systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out to clarify the effects of probiotics on the clinical outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients. The Scopus, PubMed/Medline, ISI Web of Science, and Google Scholar online databases were searched up to February 2023. All meta-analyses evaluating the impact of probiotics in patients under MV were considered eligible. The assessment of multiple systematic reviews (AMSTAR) questionnaire was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. Data were pooled using the random-effects approach. Thirty meta-analyses and nine clinical outcomes were re-analyzed. Probiotics significantly decreased ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) incidence, nosocomial infections, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, hospital length of stay, ICU mortality, hospital mortality, MV duration, duration of antibiotic use, and diarrhea. The obtained results of the current umbrella meta-analysis indicate that probiotic administration could be considered an adjunct therapy for critically ill patients; however, no specific probiotic treatment regimen can be recommended due to the diverse probiotics used in the included meta-analyses. The following microorganisms were used at various doses and combinations throughout the studies: Lacticaseibacillus casei, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum, L. acidophilus, L. delbrueckii, L. bulgaricus, Bifidobacterium longum, B. breve, B. salivarius, Pediococcus pentosaceus, Lactococcus raffinolactis, B. infantis, B. bifidum, Streptococcus thermophilus, Ligilactobacillus salivarius, L. lactis, B. lactis, Saccharomyces boulardii, L. rhamnosus GG, L. johnsonii, L. casei, S. faecalis, Clostridium butyricum, Bacillus mesentericus, L. sporogenes, S. boulardii, L. paracasei, B. subtilis, and Enterococcus faecium.

Surveillance and prevention of healthcare-associated infections: best practices to prevent ventilator-associated events

INTRODUCTION

Ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) leads to an increase in morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. In addition to increased evidence from the latest European and American guidelines (published in 2017 and 2022, respectively), in the last two years, several important clinical experiences have added new prevention tools to be included to improve the management of VAP.

AREAS COVERED

This paper is a narrative review of new evidence on VAP prevention. We divided VAP prevention measures into pharmacological, non-pharmacological, and ventilator care bundles.

EXPERT OPINION

Most of the effective strategies that have been shown to decrease the incidence of complications are easy to implement and inexpensive. The implementation of care bundles, accompanied by educational measures and a multidisciplinary team should be part of optimal management. In addition to ventilator care bundles for the prevention of VAP, it could possibly be beneficial to use ventilator care bundles for the prevention of noninfectious ventilator associated events.

Accounting for the health risk of probiotics

Probiotics have long been associated with a myriad of health benefits, so much so that their adverse effects whether mild or severe, are often neglected or overshadowed by the enormous volume of articles describing their beneficial effects in the current literature. Recent evidence has demonstrated several health risks of probiotics that warrant serious reconsideration of their applications and further investigations. This review aims to highlight studies that report on how probiotics might cause opportunistic systemic and local infections, detrimental immunological effects, metabolic disturbance, allergic reactions, and facilitating the spread of antimicrobial resistance. To offer a recent account of the literature, articles within the last five years were prioritized. The narration of these evidence was based on the nature of the studies in the following order of preference: clinical studies or human samples, in vivo or animal models, in situ, in vitro and/or in silico. We hope that this review will inform consumers, food scientists, and medical practitioners, on the health risks, while also encouraging research that will focus on and clarify the adverse effects of probiotics.

Efficacy of preventive interventions against ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients: an umbrella review of meta-analyses

Many meta-analyses have assessed the efficacy of preventive interventions against ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in critically ill patients. However, there has been no comprehensive analysis of the strength and quality of evidence to date. Systematic reviews of randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials, which evaluated the effect of preventive strategies on the incidence of VAP in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation for at least 48 h, were included in this article. We identified a total of 34 interventions derived from 31 studies. Among these interventions, 19 resulted in a significantly reduced incidence of VAP. Among numerous strategies, only selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) was supported by highly suggestive (Class II) evidence (risk ratio (RR)=0.439, 95% CI: 0.362-0.532). Based on data from the sensitivity analysis, the evidence for the efficacy of non-invasive ventilation in weaning from mechanical ventilation (NIV) was upgraded from weak (Class IV) to highly suggestive (Class II) (RR=0.32, 95% CI: 0.22-0.46). All preventive interventions were not supported by robust evidence for reducing mortality. Early mobilization exhibited suggestive (Class III) evidence in shortening both intensive length of stay (LOS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) (mean difference (MD)=-0.85, 95% CI: -1.21 to -0.49) and duration of mechanical ventilation (MD=-1.02, 95% CI: -1.41 to -0.63). In conclusion, SDD and NIV are supported by robust evidence for prevention against VAP, while early mobilization has been shown to significantly shorten the LOS in the ICU and the duration of mechanical ventilation. These three strategies are recommendable for inclusion in the ventilator bundle to lower the risk of VAP and improve the prognosis of critically ill patients.

Best evidence summary for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients

AIM

To evaluate and summarize the evidence for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients and provide reference for clinical practice.

DESIGN

This study was an evidence summary followed by the evidence summary reporting standard of Fudan University Center for Evidence-based Nursing.

METHODS

Current literatures were systematically searched for the best evidence for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients. Literature types included clinical guidelines, best practice information sheets, expert consensuses, systematic reviews, evidence summaries and cohort studies.

DATA SOURCES

UpToDate, BMJ Best Practice, Joanna Briggs Institute, Guidelines International Network, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Sinomed, Web of Science, Yi Maitong Guidelines Network, DynaMed, MEDLINE, CNKI, WanFang database, Chinese Medical Journal Full-text Database, European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism website, the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition website were searched from January 2012 to April 2023.

RESULTS

We finally identified 18 articles that had high-quality results. We summarized the 24 pieces of best evidence from these articles, covering five aspects: screening and assessment of the risk of enteral nutritional tolerance; formulation of enteral nutrition preparations; enteral nutritional feeding implementation; feeding intolerance symptom prevention and management; and multidisciplinary management. Of these pieces of evidence, 19 were 'strong' and 5 were 'weak', 7 pieces of evidence were recommended in level one and 4 pieces of evidence were recommended in level two.

CONCLUSION

The following 24 pieces of evidence for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients were finally recommended. However, as these evidences came from different countries, relevant factors such as the clinical environment should be evaluated before application. Future studies should focus on more specific symptoms of feeding intolerance and more targeted prevention design applications.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE

The clinical medical staffs are recommended to take evidence-based recommendations for the implementation of standardized enteral nutrition to improve patient outcomes and decrease gastrointestinal intolerance in critically ill patients.

IMPACT

The management of enteral nutrition feeding intolerance has always been a challenge and difficulty in critically ill patients. This study summarizes 24 pieces of the best evidence for prevention and management of enteral nutrition feeding intolerance in critically ill patients. Following and implementing these 24 pieces of evidence is beneficial to the prevention and management of feeding intolerance in clinical practice. The 24 pieces of evidence include five aspects, including screening and assessment of the risk of enteral nutritional tolerance, formulation of enteral nutrition preparations, enteral nutritional feeding implementation, feeding intolerance symptom prevention and management and multidisciplinary management. These five aspects constitute a good implementation process. Screening and assessment of enteral nutritional tolerance throughout intervention are important guarantees for developing a feasible nutrition program in critically ill patients. This study will be benefit to global medical workers in the nutritional management of critically ill patients.

REPORTING METHOD

This evidence summary followed the evidence summary reporting specifications of Fudan University Center for Evidence-based Nursing, which were based on the methodological process for the summary of the evidence produced by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). The reporting specifications include problem establishment, literature retrieval, literature screening, literature evaluation, the summary and grading of evidence and the formation of practical suggestions. This study was based on the evidence summary reporting specifications of the Fudan University Center for the Evidence-based Nursing, the register name is 'Best evidence summary for prevention and management of enteral feeding intolerance in critically ill patients', the registration number is 'ES20231823'.

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.

The Networked Interaction between Probiotics and Intestine in Health and Disease: A Promising Success Story

Probiotics are known to promote human health either precautionary in healthy individuals or therapeutically in patients suffering from certain ailments. Although this knowledge was empirical in past tomes, modern science has already verified it and expanded it to new limits. These microorganisms can be found in nature in various foods such as dairy products or in supplements formulated for clinical or preventive use. The current review examines the different mechanisms of action of the probiotic strains and how they interact with the organism of the host. Emphasis is put on the clinical therapeutic use of these beneficial microorganisms in various clinical conditions of the human gastrointestinal tract. Diseases of the gastrointestinal tract and particularly any malfunction and inflammation of the intestines seriously compromise the health of the whole organism. The interaction between the probiotic strains and the host's microbiota can alleviate the clinical signs and symptoms while in some cases, in due course, it can intervene in the underlying pathology. Various safety issues of the use of probiotics are also discussed.

A Comprehensive Review of Bioactive Compounds from Lactic Acid Bacteria: Potential Functions as Functional Food in Dietetics and the Food Industry

Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are beneficial microbes known for their health-promoting properties. LAB are well known for their ability to produce substantial amounts of bioactive compounds during fermentation. Peptides, exopolysaccharides (EPS), bacteriocins, some amylase, protease, lipase enzymes, and lactic acid are the most important bioactive compounds generated by LAB activity during fermentation. Additionally, the product produced by LAB is dependent on the type of fermentation used. LAB derived from the genera Lactobacillus and Enterococcus are the most popular probiotics at present. Consuming fermented foods has been previously connected to a number of health-promoting benefits such as antibacterial activity and immune system modulation. Furthermore, functional food implementations lead to the application of LAB in therapeutic nutrition such as prebiotic, immunomodulatory, antioxidant, anti-tumor, blood glucose lowering actions. Understanding the characteristics of LAB in diverse sources and its potential as a functional food is crucial for therapeutic applications. This review presents an overview of functional food knowledge regarding interactions between LAB isolated from dairy products (dairy LAB) and fermented foods, as well as the prospect of functioning LAB in human health. Finally, the health advantages of LAB bioactive compounds are emphasized.