Effects of probiotics, lactitol and rifaximin on intestinal flora and fecal excretion of organic acids in cirrhotic patients

Rifaximin for prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Hepatic encephalopathy describes the spectrum of neuropsychiatric changes that may complicate the course of cirrhosis and detrimentally affect outcomes. Ammonia plays a key role in its development. Rifaximin is a non-absorbable antibiotic that inhibits urease-producing bacteria and reduces absorption of dietary and bacterial ammonia.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of rifaximin versus placebo, no intervention, or non-absorbable disaccharides for: (i) the prevention of hepatic encephalopathy, and (ii) the treatment of minimal and overt hepatic encephalopathy, in people with cirrhosis, both when used alone and when combined with a non-absorbable disaccharide.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Clinical Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, the reference lists of identified papers, and relevant conference proceedings. We wrote to authors and pharmaceutical companies for information on other published, unpublished, or ongoing trials. Searches were performed to January 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials assessing prevention or treatment of hepatic encephalopathy with rifaximin alone, or with a non-absorbable disaccharide, versus placebo/no intervention, or a non-absorbable disaccharide alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Six authors independently searched for studies, extracted data, and validated findings. We assessed the design, bias risk, and participant/intervention characteristics of the included studies. We assessed mortality, serious adverse events, health-related quality of life, hepatic encephalopathy, non-serious adverse events, blood ammonia, Number Connection Test-A, and length of hospital stay.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 41 trials involving 4545 people with, or at risk for, developing hepatic encephalopathy. We excluded 89 trials and identified 13 ongoing studies. Some trials involved participants with more than one type of hepatic encephalopathy or more than one treatment comparison. Hepatic encephalopathy was classed as acute (13 trials), chronic (7 trials), or minimal (8 trials), or else participants were considered at risk for its development (13 trials). The control groups received placebo (12 trials), no/standard treatment (1 trial), or a non-absorbable disaccharide (14 trials). Eighteen trials assessed rifaximin plus a non-absorbable disaccharide versus a non-absorbable disaccharide alone. We classified 11 trials as at high risk of overall bias for mortality and 28 for non-mortality outcomes, mainly due to lack of blinding, incomplete outcome data, and selective reporting. Compared to placebo/no intervention, rifaximin likely has no overall effect on mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 1.38; P = 48, I2 = 0%; 13 trials, 1007 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and there may be no overall effect when compared to non-absorbable disaccharides (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.97; P = 0.97, I2 = 0%; 10 trials, 786 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, there is likely a reduction in the overall risk of mortality when comparing rifaximin plus a non-absorbable disaccharide to a non-absorbable disaccharide alone (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.86; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 22; P = 0.001, I2 = 0%; 14 trials, 1946 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is likely no effect on the overall risk of serious adverse events when comparing rifaximin to placebo/no intervention (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.32; P = 68, I2 = 0%; 9 trials, 801 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and there may be no overall effect when compared to non-absorbable disaccharides (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.40; P = 85, I2 = 0%; 8 trials, 681 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, there was very low-certainty evidence that use of rifaximin plus a non-absorbable disaccharide may be associated with a lower risk of serious adverse events than use of a non-absorbable disaccharide alone (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.98; P = 0.04, I2 = 60%; 7 trials, 1076 participants). Rifaximin likely results in an overall effect on health-related quality of life when compared to placebo/no intervention (mean difference (MD) -1.43, 95% CI -2.87 to 0.02; P = 0.05, I2 = 81%; 4 trials, 214 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may benefit health-related quality of life in people with minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MD -2.07, 95% CI -2.79 to -1.35; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%; 3 trials, 176 participants). The overall effect on health-related quality of life when comparing rifaximin to non-absorbable disaccharides is very uncertain (MD -0.33, 95% CI -1.65 to 0.98; P = 0.62, I2 = 0%; 2 trials, 249 participants; very low-certainty evidence). None of the combined rifaximin/non-absorbable disaccharide trials reported on this outcome. There is likely an overall beneficial effect on hepatic encephalopathy when comparing rifaximin to placebo/no intervention (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.77; NNTB = 5; P < 0.001, I2 = 68%; 13 trials, 1009 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This effect may be more marked in people with minimal hepatic encephalopathy (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.52; NNTB = 3; P < 0.001, I2 = 10%; 6 trials, 364 participants) and in prevention trials (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.91; NNTB = 10; P = 0.007, I2 = 36%; 4 trials, 474 participants). There may be little overall effect on hepatic encephalopathy when comparing rifaximin to non-absorbable disaccharides (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.05; P = 0.13, I2 = 0%; 13 trials, 921 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, there may be an overall beneficial effect on hepatic encephalopathy when comparing rifaximin plus a non-absorbable disaccharide to a non-absorbable disaccharide alone (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.71; NNTB = 5; P < 0.001, I2 = 62%; 17 trials, 2332 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to placebo/no intervention, rifaximin likely improves health-related quality of life in people with minimal hepatic encephalopathy, and may improve hepatic encephalopathy, particularly in populations with minimal hepatic encephalopathy and when it is used for prevention. Rifaximin likely has no overall effect on mortality, serious adverse events, health-related quality of life, or hepatic encephalopathy compared to non-absorbable disaccharides. However, when used in combination with a non-absorbable disaccharide, it likely reduces overall mortality risk, the risk of serious adverse events, improves hepatic encephalopathy, reduces the length of hospital stay, and prevents the occurrence/recurrence of hepatic encephalopathy. The certainty of evidence for these outcomes is very low to moderate; further high-quality trials are needed.

Relationship between intestinal flora and inflammatory factors in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis

This study was conducted to analyze the change in intestinal flora of patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and its correlation to the levels of the inflammatory cytokines interleukin-10 (IL-10) and IL-17. We selected 90 patients that were diagnosed with and treated for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis as the patient group and 80 healthy cases as the control group. We then compared the intestinal flora in the subject feces and the intestinal colonization resistance (B/E, Bifidobacterium to Enterobacter) of both groups. Using RT-PCR, we also detected IL-10 and IL-17 mRNA levels in the peripheral blood mononuclear cells of both groups. Furthermore, we used the ELISA method to determine serum IL-10 and IL-17 levels in order to explore the correlation between IL-10, IL-17 and B/E. The number of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus were significantly lower in the patient group than the control group (P<0.05), while Enterobacter and Enterococcus pathogenic bacteria were significantly higher in the patient group than the control group (P<0.05). The B/E value was lower in the patient group than the control group (P<0.05). The relative expression of IL-10 and IL-17 mRNA in the patient group was significantly higher than in the control group (P<0.05). In the patient group, the serum IL-10 levels were 1.17±0.15 pg/ml, which is significantly higher than the control group serum IL-10 levels which were 0.32±0.04 pg/ml (P<0.05). The serum IL-17 levels in the patient groups were 0.96±0.11 pg/ml, which was significantly higher than the control group, which had an average of 0.28±0.01 pg/ml serum IL-17 levels (P<0.05). Pearson's correlation analysis showed that the change of B/E value of intestinal flora in the patients group were negatively correlated with serum IL-10 (r=−0.546, P<0.05), and negatively correlated with serum IL-17 (r=−0.535, P<0.05). Therefore, compared to healthy people, the expression of IL-10 and IL-17 in the peripheral blood of patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver is high. The changes in intestinal flora in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis are closely related to the changes of serum IL-10 and IL-17 levels, and they are involved in the development of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.

The Effects of Probiotics and Symbiotics on Risk Factors for Hepatic Encephalopathy: A Systematic Review

Alterations in the levels of intestinal microbiota, endotoxemia, and inflammation are novel areas of interest in the pathogenesis of hepatic encephalopathy (HE). Probiotics and symbiotics are a promising treatment option for HE due to possible beneficial effects in modulating gut microflora and might be better tolerated and more cost-effective than the traditional treatment with lactulose, rifaximin or L-ornithine-L-aspartate. A systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed, ISI Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library was conducted for randomized controlled clinical trials in adult patients with cirrhosis, evaluating the effect of probiotics and symbiotics in changes on intestinal microflora, reduction of endotoxemia, inflammation, and ammonia, reversal of minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE), prevention of overt hepatic encephalopathy (OHE), and improvement of quality of life. Nineteen trials met the inclusion criteria. Probiotics and symbiotics increased beneficial microflora and decreased pathogenic bacteria and endotoxemia compared with placebo/no treatment, but no effect was observed on inflammation. Probiotics significantly reversed MHE [risk ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.14, 2.05; P=0.005] and reduced OHE development (risk ratio, 0.62; 95% CI: 0.48, 0.80; P=0.0002) compared with placebo/no treatment. Symbiotics significantly decreased ammonia levels compared with placebo (15.24; 95% CI: -26.01, -4.47; P=0.006). Probiotics did not show any additional benefit on reversal of MHE and prevention of OHE development when compared with lactulose, rifaximin, and L-ornithine-L-aspartate. Only 5 trials considered tolerance with minimal side effects reported. Although further research is warranted, probiotics and symbiotics should be considered as an alternative therapy for the treatment and management of HE given the results reported in this systematic review.

Probiotics for people with hepatic encephalopathy

BACKGROUND

Hepatic encephalopathy is a disorder of brain function as a result of liver failure or portosystemic shunt or both. Both hepatic encephalopathy (clinically overt) and minimal hepatic encephalopathy (not clinically overt) significantly impair patient's quality of life and daily functioning, and represent a significant burden on healthcare resources. Probiotics are live micro-organisms, which when administered in adequate amounts, may confer a health benefit on the host.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the beneficial and harmful effects of probiotics in any dosage, compared with placebo or no intervention, or with any other treatment for people with any grade of acute or chronic hepatic encephalopathy. This review did not consider the primary prophylaxis of hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, conference proceedings, reference lists of included trials, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform until June 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials that compared probiotics in any dosage with placebo or no intervention, or with any other treatment in people with hepatic encephalopathy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. We conducted random-effects model meta-analysis due to obvious heterogeneity of participants and interventions. We defined a P value of 0.05 or less as significant. We expressed dichotomous outcomes as risk ratio (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 trials with 1420 participants, of these, 14 were new trials. Fourteen trials compared a probiotic with placebo or no treatment, and seven trials compared a probiotic with lactulose. The trials used a variety of probiotics; the most commonly used group of probiotic was VSL#3, a proprietary name for a group of eight probiotics. Duration of administration ranged from 10 days to 180 days. Eight trials declared their funding source, of which six were independently funded and two were industry funded. The remaining 13 trials did not disclose their funding source. We classified 19 of the 21 trials at high risk of bias.We found no effect on all-cause mortality when probiotics were compared with placebo or no treatment (7 trials; 404 participants; RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.44; low-quality evidence). No-recovery (as measured by incomplete resolution of symptoms) was lower for participants treated with probiotic (10 trials; 574 participants; RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.79; moderate-quality evidence). Adverse events were lower for participants treated with probiotic than with no intervention when considering the development of overt hepatic encephalopathy (10 trials; 585 participants; RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.51; low-quality evidence), but effects on hospitalisation and change of/or withdrawal from treatment were uncertain (hospitalisation: 3 trials, 163 participants; RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.11 to 4.00; very low-quality evidence; change of/or withdrawal from treatment: 9 trials, 551 participants; RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.07; very low-quality evidence). Probiotics may slightly improve quality of life compared with no intervention (3 trials; 115 participants; results not meta-analysed; low-quality evidence). Plasma ammonia concentration was lower for participants treated with probiotic (10 trials; 705 participants; MD -8.29 μmol/L, 95% CI -13.17 to -3.41; low-quality evidence). There were no reports of septicaemia attributable to probiotic in any trial.When probiotics were compared with lactulose, the effects on all-cause mortality were uncertain (2 trials; 200 participants; RR 5.00, 95% CI 0.25 to 102.00; very low-quality evidence); lack of recovery (7 trials; 430 participants; RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.21; very low-quality evidence); adverse events considering the development of overt hepatic encephalopathy (6 trials; 420 participants; RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.17; very low-quality evidence); hospitalisation (1 trial; 80 participants; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.07; very low-quality evidence); intolerance leading to discontinuation (3 trials; 220 participants; RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.43; very low-quality evidence); change of/or withdrawal from treatment (7 trials; 490 participants; RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.82; very low-quality evidence); quality of life (results not meta-analysed; 1 trial; 69 participants); and plasma ammonia concentration overall (6 trials; 325 participants; MD -2.93 μmol/L, 95% CI -9.36 to 3.50; very low-quality evidence). There were no reports of septicaemia attributable to probiotic in any trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The majority of included trials suffered from a high risk of systematic error ('bias') and a high risk of random error ('play of chance'). Accordingly, we consider the evidence to be of low quality. Compared with placebo or no intervention, probiotics probably improve recovery and may lead to improvements in the development of overt hepatic encephalopathy, quality of life, and plasma ammonia concentrations, but probiotics may lead to little or no difference in mortality. Whether probiotics are better than lactulose for hepatic encephalopathy is uncertain because the quality of the available evidence is very low. High-quality randomised clinical trials with standardised outcome collection and data reporting are needed to further clarify the true efficacy of probiotics.

Synbiotic effects of lactitol and Lactobacillus acidophilus NCFM™ in a semi-continuous colon fermentation model

The effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus NCFM™, lactitol, and the combination of lactitol and L. acidophilus NCFM™ were studied with a semi-continuous colon fermentation simulation; consisting of compartments mimicking, ascending, transverse, descending and sigmoid colon and their conditions with faecal inoculation. L. acidophilus NCFM™ was detected throughout the colon simulator. Lactitol was utilised early on by the microbes in the proximal part of the simulator. Lactitol increased the total numbers of microbes and bifidobacteria, and decreased clostridia cluster IV, while L. acidophilus NCFM™ alone decreased the numbers of clostridia cluster XIV. Combination treatment increased the numbers of bifidobacteria. Furthermore, concentrations of acetic acid, butyric acid and the sum of total short-chain fatty acids were increased by both lactitol-including treatments. The treatment with L. acidophilus NCFM™ alone increased the concentration of propionic acid and butyric acid. L. acidophilus NCFM™ tended to increase the total concentrations of biogenic amines, while lactitol suppressed production of biogenic amines also in the presence of L. acidophilus NCFM™. True synergistic effects are suggested in stimulation of the production of butyrate, an important microbial metabolite for colon health. In conclusion, lactitol as well as the combination of lactitol and L. acidophilus NCFM™ were found to exhibit complementary beneficial effects on the colon microbial composition and activity.

Probiotics for patients with hepatic encephalopathy

BACKGROUND

Hepatic encephalopathy is a disorder of brain function as a result of liver failure and/or portosystemic shunt. Both hepatic encephalopathy (clinically overt) and minimal hepatic encephalopathy (not clinically overt) significantly impair patient's quality of life and daily functioning and represent a significant burden on health care resources. Probiotics are live microorganisms, which when administered in adequate amounts may confer a health benefit on the host.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the beneficial and harmful effects of any probiotic in any dosage, compared with placebo or no intervention, or with any other treatment for patients with any grade of acute or chronic hepatic encephalopathy as assessed from randomised trials.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, conference proceedings, reference lists of included trials and the WHO international clinical trials registry until April 2011 registry platform to identify new and ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials that compared probiotics in any dosage with placebo or no intervention, or with any other treatment in patients with hepatic encephalopathy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently assessed the risk of bias of the included trials and extracted data on relevant outcomes, with differences resolved by consensus. We conducted random-effects model meta-analysis due to obvious heterogeneity of patients and interventions. A P value of 0.05 or less was defined as significant. Dichotomous outcomes are expressed as risk ratio (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven trials of which 550 participants were randomised. Four of the seven trials compared a probiotic with placebo or no treatment in 245 participants, another trial compared a probiotic with lactulose in 40 participants , and the remaining two trials compared a probiotic with both placebo and lactulose in 265 participants. Each trial used different types of probiotics. Duration of administration of the experimental intervention varied from 10 days to 180 days. Two trials were industry funded, and five were unclear about origin of funding. All trials had high risk of bias. When probiotics were compared with no treatment, there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (2 trials, 105 participants; 1/57 (2%) versus 1/48 (2%): RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.08 to 6.60), lack of recovery (4 trials, 206 participants; 54/107 (50%) versus 68/99 (69%): RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.49 to 1.05), adverse events (3 trials, 145 participants; 2/77 (3%) versus 6/68 (9%): RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.08 to 1.42), quality of life (1 trial, 20 participants contributed to the physical quality of life measurement, 20 participants contributed to the mental quality of life: MD Physical 0.00; 95% CI -5.47 to 5.47; MD Mental 4.00; 95% CI -1.82 to 9.82), or change of/or withdrawal from treatment (3 trials, 175 participants; 11/92 (12%) versus 7/83 (8%): RR 1.28; 95% CI 0.52 to 3.19). No trial reported sepsis or duration of hospital stay as an outcome. Plasma ammonia concentration was significantly lower for participants treated with probiotic at one month (3 trials, 226 participants: MD -2.99 μmol/L; 95% CI -5.70 to -0.29) but not at two months (3 trials, 181 participants: MD -1.82 μmol/L; 95% CI -14.04 to 10.41). Plasma ammonia decreased the most in the participants treated with probiotic at three months (1 trial, 73 participants: MD -6.79 μmol/L; 95% CI -10.39 to -3.19). When probiotics were compared with lactulose no trial reported all-cause mortality, quality of life, duration of hospital stay, or septicaemia. There were no significant differences in lack of recovery (3 trials, 173 participants; 47/87 (54%) versus 44/86 (51%): RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.47), adverse events (2 trials, 111 participants; 3/56 (5%) versus 6/55 (11%): RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.06 to 5.74), change of/or withdrawal from treatment at one month (3 trials, 190 participants; 8/95 (8%) versus 7/95 (7%): RR 1.10; 95% CI 0.40 to 3.03), plasma ammonia concentration (2 trials, 93 participants: MD -6.61 μmol/L; 95% CI -30.05 to 16.84), or change in plasma ammonia concentration (1 trial, 77 participants: MD 1.16 μmol/L; 95% CI -1.96 to 4.28).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The trials we located suffered from a high risk of systematic errors ('bias') and high risk of random errors ('play of chance'). While probiotics appear to reduce plasma ammonia concentration when compared with placebo or no intervention, we are unable to conclude that probiotics are efficacious in altering clinically relevant outcomes. Demonstration of unequivocal efficacy is needed before probiotics can be endorsed as effective therapy for hepatic encephalopathy. Further randomised clinical trials are needed.

Influence of a combination of Lactobacillus acidophilus NCFM and lactitol on healthy elderly: intestinal and immune parameters

With increasing age, a number of physiological changes take place which are reflected in immune and bowel function. These changes may relate to the commonly assumed age-related changes in intestinal microbiota; most noticeably a reduction in bifidobacteria. The current study aimed at modifying the intestinal microbiota with a potential synbiotic on selected immune and microbiota markers. Healthy elderly subjects were randomised to consume during 2 weeks either a placebo (sucrose) or a combination of lactitol and Lactobacillus acidophilus NCFM twice daily in a double-blind parallel trial. After the intervention, stool frequency was higher in the synbiotic group than in the placebo group and a significant increase in faecal L. acidophilus NCFM levels was observed in the synbiotic group, after baseline correction. In contrast to the generally held opinion, the study subjects had faecal Bifidobacterium levels that were similar to those reported in healthy young adults. These levels were, nevertheless, significantly increased by the intervention. Levels of SCFA were not changed significantly. Of the measured immune markers, PGE2 levels were different between treatments and IgA levels changed over time. These changes were modest which may relate to the fact that the volunteers were healthy. Spermidine levels changed over time which may suggest an improved mucosal integrity and intestinal motility. The results suggest that consumption of lactitol combined with L. acidophilus NCFM twice daily may improve some markers of the intestinal microbiota composition and mucosal functions.

Single-blind follow-up study on the effectiveness of a symbiotic preparation in irritable bowel syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Experimental and clinical studies have shown that a novel symbiotic (known as SCM-III) exerts a beneficial effect on gut translocation and local and systemic inflammatory and microbial metabolic parameters. The present investigation was a preliminary trial on the effectiveness of SCM-III for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).

METHODS

Sixty-eight consecutive adult patients with IBS who were free from lactose malabsorption, abdominal surgery, overt psychiatric disorders and ongoing psychotropic drug therapy or ethanol abuse were studied prospectively and divided into 2 groups that were comparable for age, gender, body size, education and pattern of presenting symptoms. The 2 groups were blindly given for 12 weeks either SCM-III 10 mL t.i.d or the same dosage of heat-inactivated symbiotic.

RESULTS

Treatment with SCM-III was 'effective' or 'very effective' in more than 80% of the patients (P < 0.01 vs baseline values and control). Less than 5% reported 'not effective' as the final evaluation compared with over 40% of patients in the control group. After 6 weeks of treatment, a significant improvement of pain and bloating was reported in the treatment group compared with control and baseline values. There was also a benefit for bowel habits, mostly for patients with constipation or alternating bowel habits. No overt clinical or biochemical adverse side-effects were recorded.

CONCLUSION

Compared with baseline values and the control group, SCM-III resulted in a significant increase in lactobacilla, eubacteria and bifidobacteria, which suggests that some selected IBS patients could benefit substantially from symbiotics, but the treatment may need to be given on a cyclic schedule because of the temporary modification of the fecal flora.