Probiotics for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

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

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of enteral Synbiotic 2000 FORTE (a mixture of lactic acid bacteria and fibre) on the incidence of ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP) in critically ill patients.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial.

SETTING

Tertiary referral centre, general Adult Intensive Care Unit (ICU).

PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS

259 enterally fed patients requiring mechanical ventilation for 48 h or more were enrolled.

INTERVENTION

All patients were enterally fed as per a standard protocol and randomly assigned to receive either synbiotic 2000 FORTE (twice a day) or a cellulose-based placebo for a maximum of 28 days.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Treatment group (n = 130) was well matched with placebo group (n = 129) for age (mean 49.5 and 50 years, respectively) and APACHE II score (median 17 for both). Oropharyngeal microbial flora and colonisation rates were unaffected by synbiotics. The overall incidence of VAP was lower than anticipated (11.2%) and no statistical difference was demonstrated between groups receiving synbiotic and placebo in the incidence of VAP (9 and 13%, P = 0.42), VAP rate per 1,000 ventilator days (13 and 14.6, P = 0.91) or hospital mortality (27 and 33%, P = 0.39), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Enteral administration of Synbiotic 2000 FORTE has no statistically significant impact on the incidence of VAP in critically ill patients.