Probiotic and prebiotic interventions for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

The effects of probiotic supplementation and exercise training on liver enzymes and cardiometabolic markers in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most prevalent chronic liver ailment worldwide, in which nonpharmacological strategies have a considerable role in the treatment. Probiotic supplementation as well as physical exercise can improve cardiometabolic parameters, but further research is needed to determine the effects of combined treatment versus exercise alone in managing NAFLD-associated biomarkers, primarily liver enzymes, lipid markers, and insulin resistance.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of probiotic supplementation, combined with exercise versus exercise alone, on liver enzymes and cardiometabolic markers in patients with NAFLD.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials was performed by searching PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases up to April 2024. The search was restricted to articles published in the English language and human studies. Random effects models were used to calculate weighted mean differences (WMD).

RESULTS

Pooled estimates (9 studies, 615 patients, intervention durations ranging from 8 to 48 weeks) revealed that probiotics plus exercise decreased aspartate transaminase (AST) [WMD=-5.64 U/L, p = 0.02], gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) [WMD=-7.09 U/L, p = 0.004], low-density lipoprotein (LDL) [WMD=-8.98 mg/dL, p = 0.03], total cholesterol (TC) [WMD=-16.97 mg/dL, p = 0.01], and homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) [WMD=-0.94, p = 0.005] significantly more than exercise only. However, probiotics plus exercise did not significantly change high-density lipoprotein (HDL) [WMD = 0.07 mg/dL, p = 0.9], fasting insulin [WMD=-1.47 µIU/mL, p = 0.4] or fasting blood glucose (FBG) [WMD=-1.57 mg/dL, p = 0.3] compared with exercise only. While not statistically significant, there were clinically relevant reductions in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) [WMD=-6.78 U/L, p = 0.1], triglycerides (TG) [WMD=-21.84 mg/dL, p = 0.1], and body weight (BW) [WMD=-1.45 kg, p = 0.5] for probiotics plus exercise compared with exercise only. The included studies exhibited significant heterogeneity for AST (I2 = 78.99%, p = 0.001), GGT (I2 = 73.87%, p = 0.004), LDL (I2 = 62.78%, p = 0.02), TC (I2 = 72.41%, p = 0.003), HOMA-IR (I2 = 93.86%, p = 0.001), HDL (I2 = 0.00%, p = 0.9), FBG (I2 = 66.30%, p = 0.01), ALT (I2 = 88.08%, p = 0.001), and TG (I2 = 85.46%, p = 0.001). There was no significant heterogeneity among the included studies for BW (I2 = 0.00%, p = 0.9).

CONCLUSION

Probiotic supplementation combined with exercise training elicited better results compared to exercise alone on liver enzymes, lipid profile, and insulin resistance in patients with NAFLD.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number CRD42023424290.

Optimal probiotic combinations for treating nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Probiotic administration is a promising therapy for improving conditions in NAFLD patients. This network meta-analysis aimed to compare and estimate the relative effects of probiotic interventions and identify the optimal probiotic species for the treatment of NAFLD (Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease) patients.

METHODS

The PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to 29 January 2024 to identify RCTs that were published in English. The GRADE framework was used to assess the quality of evidence contributing to each network estimate.

RESULTS

A total of 35 RCTs involving 2212 NAFLD patients were included in the analysis. For primary outcomes, Lactobacillus + Bifidobacterium + Streptococcus exhibited the highest probability of being the finest probiotic combination in terms of enhancing acceptability as well as reducing AST (SMD: -1.95 95% CI: -2.90, -0.99), ALT (SMD = -1.67, 95% CI: -2.48, -0.85), and GGT levels (SMD = -2.17, 95% CI: -3.27, -1.06). In terms of the secondary outcomes, Lactobacillus + Bifidobacterium + Streptococcus was also the best probiotic combination for reducing BMI (SMD = -0.45, 95% CI: -0.86, -0.04), LDL levels (SMD = -0.45, 95% CI: -0.87, -0.02), TC levels (SMD = -1.09, 95% CI: -1.89, -0.29), and TNF-α levels (SMD = -1.73, 95% CI: -2.72, -0.74).

CONCLUSION

This network meta-analysis revealed that Lactobacillus + Bifidobacterium + Streptococcus may be the most effective probiotic combination for the treatment of liver enzymes, lipid profiles, and inflammation factors. These findings can be used to guide the development of a probiotics-based treatment guideline for NAFLD since there are few direct comparisons between different therapies.

The effects of prebiotic, probiotic or synbiotic supplementation on overweight/obesity indicators: an umbrella review of the trials' meta-analyses

Background

There is controversial data on the effects of prebiotic, probiotic, or synbiotic supplementations on overweight/obesity indicators. Thus, we aimed to clarify this role of biotics through an umbrella review of the trials' meta-analyses.

Methods

All meta-analyses of the clinical trials conducted on the impact of biotics on overweight/obesity indicators in general populations, pregnant women, and infants published until June 2023 in PubMed, Web of Sciences, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Library web databases included. The meta-analysis of observational and systematic review studies without meta-analysis were excluded. We reported the results by implementing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) flowchart. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR2) and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) systems were used to assess the methodological quality and quality of evidence.

Results

Overall, 97 meta-analysis studies were included. Most studies were conducted on the effect of probiotics in both genders. Consumption of prebiotic: 8-66 g/day, probiotic: 104 -1.35×1015 colony-forming unit (CFU)/day, and synbiotic: 106-1.5×1011 CFU/day and 0.5-300 g/day for 2 to 104 weeks showed a favorable effect on the overweight/obesity indicators. Moreover, an inverse association was observed between biotics consumption and overweight/obesity risk in adults in most of the studies. Biotics did not show any beneficial effect on weight and body mass index (BMI) in pregnant women by 6.6×105-1010 CFU/day of probiotics during 1-25 weeks and 1×109-112.5×109 CFU/capsule of synbiotics during 4-8 weeks. The effect of biotics on weight and BMI in infants is predominantly non-significant. Prebiotics and probiotics used in infancy were from 0.15 to 0.8 g/dL and 2×106-6×109 CFU/day for 2-24 weeks, respectively.

Conclusion

It seems biotics consumption can result in favorable impacts on some anthropometric indices of overweight/obesity (body weight, BMI, waist circumference) in the general population, without any significant effects on birth weight or weight gain during pregnancy and infancy. So, it is recommended to intake the biotics as complementary medications for reducing anthropometric indices of overweight/obese adults. However, more well-designed trials are needed to elucidate the anti-obesity effects of specific strains of probiotics.

The Potential Impact of Probiotics on Human Health: An Update on Their Health-Promoting Properties

Probiotics, known to be live microorganisms, have been shown to improve or restore the gut microbiota, which in turn has been linked to improved health. It is believed that probiotics are the modern equivalent of a panacea, with claims that they may treat or prevent different diseases both in children and adults (e.g., from colic in babies to cardiovascular disease, respiratory infection, and cancer in adults). Ever since the early 2000s, probiotic-based fermented foods have had a resurgence in popularity, mostly due to claims made regarding their health benefits. Fermented foods have been associated with the prevention of irritable bowel syndrome, lactose intolerance, gastroenteritis, and obesity, but also other conditions such as chronic diarrhea, allergies, dermatitis, and bacterial and viral infections, all of which are closely related to an unhealthy lifestyle. Recent and ongoing developments in microbiome/microbiota science have given us new research directions for probiotics. The new types, mechanisms, and applications studied so far, and those currently under study, have a great potential to change scientific understanding of probiotics' nutritional applications and human health care. The expansion of fields related to the study of the microbiome and the involvement of probiotics in its improvement foreshadow an era of significant changes. An expanding range of candidate probiotic species is emerging that can address newly elucidated data-driven microbial niches and host targets. In the probiotic field, new variants of microbiome-modulating interventions are being developed, including prebiotics, symbiotics, postbiotics, microbial consortia, live biotherapeutic products, and genetically modified organisms, with renewed interest in polyphenols, fibers, and fermented foods to ensure human health. This manuscript aims to analyze recent, emerging, and anticipated trends in probiotics (sources, doses, mechanism of action, diseases for which probiotics are administered, side effects, and risks) and create a vision for the development of related areas of influence in the field.

Health Effects of Probiotics on Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver in the Life Cycle Based on Data Analysis

Objective

To observe the effect of intestinal probiotics in the treatment of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and the effect on liver function and inflammatory factors.

Methods

34 healthy rats were selected for the study and divided into 10 rats in the control group, 12 rats in the model group, and 12 rats in the treatment group according to the random number table method. The control group was given behavioral and lifestyle interventions, and the treatment group was given Bifidobacterium minus Black enteric capsules 5 g/(kg-d) by strong feeding method on the basis of the control group. The fatty liver index (FLI), liver ultrasound examination results, liver function, and inflammatory factor levels were compared among the three groups. After 8 weeks of treatment, there were statistically significant differences between the FLI values and liver ultrasound results of the three groups, and the serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), triacylglycerol (TG), and total cholesterol (TC) levels of the observation group were lower than those of the control group and the model group. The levels of serum high molecular weight lipocalin (HMW-APN) and interleukin 22 (IL-22) in the observation group were higher than those in the control group, and the levels of tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) were lower than those in the control and model groups, and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Intestinal probiotics can improve the clinical efficacy of patients with NAFLD, improve liver function, and alleviate the inflammatory response, in order to provide a theoretical basis for the clinical treatment of patients with NAFLD.

Sinapine improves LPS-induced oxidative stress in hepatocytes by down-regulating MCJ protein expression

Oxidative stress is an important part of the development of NAFLD, and hepatic injury can be prevented by inhibiting oxidative stress. In this study, we investigated the potential role of sinapine in protecting the liver. LPS was selected to establish the oxidative stress model of THLE-2 cells, and the treatment concentrations of LPS (5 μg/mL) and sinapine (5 μM, 20 μM, and 80 μM) were determined by toxicity experiments. The MDA of the sinapine (80 μM) pretreatment group was 1.09 ± 0.13 nmol/mg prot which was reduced by 27.67 % compared with the LPS group. Furthermore, SOD and GSH-Px levels were significantly increased by 40.61 % and 49.60 %, respectively. And the ROS levels of 20 and 80 μM sinapine were reduced by 31.47 % and 40.31 %, respectively (p < 0.01) compared with the model group. The mitochondrial membrane potential had similar results. It was also found that sinapine can significantly down-regulate the level of MCJ protein (p < 0.01), which is related to oxidative stress. Our results indicate that sinapine can maintain liver health by down-regulating the expression of MCJ protein to inhibit oxidative stress, which provides a theoretical basis for the use of sinapine as an inhibitor of MCJ.