Lack of effect of Lactobacillus GG on antibiotic-associated diarrhea: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Probiotics for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate existing evidence for the use of probiotics in preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD) in adults.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

We performed a literature search of the electronic databases CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, MEDLINE (Ovid) and Web of Science from database inception to May 2021 as well as hand searching of trial registries and reference lists of related reviews.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers identified whether RCTs met the following inclusion criteria: adult population to whom antibiotics were administered; a probiotic intervention; a placebo, alternative dose, alternative probiotic strain or no treatment control; and incidence of AAD as the outcome.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently collected data and assessed risk of bias using preconstructed data extraction forms. We used a random effects model for all analyses. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate species-specific and dose-specific response.

RESULTS

Forty-two studies (11,305 participants) were included in this review. The pooled analysis suggests that co-administration of probiotics with antibiotics reduces the risk of AAD in adults by 37% (risk ratio (RR)=0.63 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.73), p<0.00001). The overall quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria was found to be moderate. In subgroup analyses, high dose compared with low dose of the same probiotic demonstrated a positive protective effect (RR 0.54 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.76), p<0.01), and only certain species, mainly of the lactobacillus and bifidobacteria genera, were found to be effective. Studies with a low baseline AAD risk did not show any difference in risk but studies with moderate or high baseline AAD risk demonstrated a significant risk reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Probiotics are effective for preventing AAD. Secondary analyses of higher dosages and certain species have shown increased effectiveness. Our results may not be applicable in clinical scenarios of lower baseline AAD risk.

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.

Probiotics in the next-generation sequencing era

Technological developments, including massively parallel DNA sequencing, gnotobiotics, metabolomics, RNA sequencing and culturomics, have markedly propelled the field of microbiome research in recent years. These methodologies can be harnessed to improve our in-depth mechanistic understanding of basic concepts related to consumption of probiotics, including their rules of engagement with the indigenous microbiome and impacts on the human host. We have recently demonstrated that even during probiotic supplementation, resident gut bacteria in a subset of individuals resist the mucosal presence of probiotic strains, limiting their modulatory effect on the microbiome and on the host gut transcriptional landscape. Resistance is partly alleviated by antibiotics treatment, which enables probiotics to interact with the host at the gut mucosal interface, although rather than promoting reconstitution of the indigenous microbiome and of the host transcriptional profile, they inhibit these components from returning to their naïve pre-antibiotic configurations. In this commentary, we discuss our findings in the context of previous and recent works, and suggest that incorporating the state-of-the-art methods currently utilized in microbiome research into the field of probiotics may lead to improved understanding of their mechanisms of activity, as well as their efficacy and long-term safety.

Strain-Specificity and Disease-Specificity of Probiotic Efficacy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

As the use and diversity of probiotic products expands, the choice of an appropriate type of probiotic is challenging for both medical care professionals and the public alike. Two vital factors in choosing the appropriate probiotic are often ignored, namely, the probiotic strain-specificity and disease-specificity for efficacy. Reviews and meta-analyses often pool together different types of probiotics, resulting in misleading conclusions of efficacy.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature (1970-2017) assessing strain-specific and disease-specific probiotic efficacy was conducted. Trials were included for probiotics with an identifiable strain (either single strain or mixtures of strains) that had at least two randomized, controlled trials for each type of disease indication. The goal was to determine if probiotic strains have strain and/or disease-specific efficacy.

Results

We included 228 trials and found evidence for both strain specificity and disease specificity for the efficacy of specific probiotic strains. Significant efficacy evidence was found for 7 (70%) of probiotic strain(s) among four preventive indications and 11 (65%) probiotic strain(s) among five treatment indications. Strain-specific efficacy for preventing adult antibiotic-associated diarrhea was clearly demonstrated within the Lactobacillus species [e.g., by the mixture of Lactobacillus acidophilus CL1285, Lactobacillus casei LBC80R, and Lactobacillus rhamnosus CLR2 (Bio-K+^®), by L. casei DN114001 (Actimel^®) and by Lactobacillus reuteri 55730], while other Lactobacillus strains did not show efficacy. Significant disease-specific variations in efficacy was demonstrated by L. rhamnosus GG and Saccharomyces boulardii CNCM I-745, as well as other probiotic strains.

Conclusion

Strong evidence was found supporting the hypothesis that the efficacy of probiotics is both strain-specific and disease-specific. Clinical guidelines and meta-analyses need to recognize the importance of reporting outcomes by both specific strain(s) of probiotics and the type of disease. The clinical relevance of these findings indicates that health-care providers need to take these two factors into consideration when recommending the appropriate probiotic for their patient.

Probiotics for the prevention of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics can disturb gastrointestinal microbiota which may lead to reduced resistance to pathogens such as Clostridium difficile (C. difficile). Probiotics are live microbial preparations that, when administered in adequate amounts, may confer a health benefit to the host, and are a potential C. difficile prevention strategy. Recent clinical practice guidelines do not recommend probiotic prophylaxis, even though probiotics have the highest quality evidence among cited prophylactic therapies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of probiotics for preventing C.difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) in adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Register from inception to 21 March 2017. Additionally, we conducted an extensive grey literature search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled (placebo, alternative prophylaxis, or no treatment control) trials investigating probiotics (any strain, any dose) for prevention of CDAD, or C. difficile infection were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors (independently and in duplicate) extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcome was the incidence of CDAD. Secondary outcomes included detection of C. difficile infection in stool, adverse events, antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) and length of hospital stay. Dichotomous outcomes (e.g. incidence of CDAD) were pooled using a random-effects model to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). We calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) where appropriate. Continuous outcomes (e.g. length of hospital stay) were pooled using a random-effects model to calculate the mean difference and corresponding 95% CI. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of missing data on efficacy and safety outcomes. For the sensitivity analyses, we assumed that the event rate for those participants in the control group who had missing data was the same as the event rate for those participants in the control group who were successfully followed. For the probiotic group, we calculated effects using the following assumed ratios of event rates in those with missing data in comparison to those successfully followed: 1.5:1, 2:1, 3:1, and 5:1. To explore possible explanations for heterogeneity, a priori subgroup analyses were conducted on probiotic species, dose, adult versus pediatric population, and risk of bias as well as a post hoc subgroup analysis on baseline risk of CDAD (low 0% to 2%; moderate 3% to 5%; high > 5%). The overall quality of the evidence supporting each outcome was independently assessed using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies (9955 participants) met the eligibility requirements for our review. Overall, 27 studies were rated as either high or unclear risk of bias. A complete case analysis (i.e. participants who completed the study) among trials investigating CDAD (31 trials, 8672 participants) suggests that probiotics reduce the risk of CDAD by 60%. The incidence of CDAD was 1.5% (70/4525) in the probiotic group compared to 4.0% (164/4147) in the placebo or no treatment control group (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.52; GRADE = moderate). Twenty-two of 31 trials had missing CDAD data ranging from 2% to 45%. Our complete case CDAD results proved robust to sensitivity analyses of plausible and worst-plausible assumptions regarding missing outcome data and results were similar whether considering subgroups of trials in adults versus children, inpatients versus outpatients, different probiotic species, lower versus higher doses of probiotics, or studies at high versus low risk of bias. However, in a post hoc analysis, we did observe a subgroup effect with respect to baseline risk of developing CDAD. Trials with a baseline CDAD risk of 0% to 2% and 3% to 5% did not show any difference in risk but trials enrolling participants with a baseline risk of > 5% for developing CDAD demonstrated a large 70% risk reduction (interaction P value = 0.01). Among studies with a baseline risk > 5%, the incidence of CDAD in the probiotic group was 3.1% (43/1370) compared to 11.6% (126/1084) in the control group (13 trials, 2454 participants; RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.42; GRADE = moderate). With respect to detection of C. difficile in the stool pooled complete case results from 15 trials (1214 participants) did not show a reduction in infection rates. C. difficile infection was 15.5% (98/633) in the probiotics group compared to 17.0% (99/581) in the placebo or no treatment control group (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.10; GRADE = moderate). Adverse events were assessed in 32 studies (8305 participants) and our pooled complete case analysis indicates probiotics reduce the risk of adverse events by 17% (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.97; GRADE = very low). In both treatment and control groups the most common adverse events included abdominal cramping, nausea, fever, soft stools, flatulence, and taste disturbance.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on this systematic review and meta-analysis of 31 randomized controlled trials including 8672 patients, moderate certainty evidence suggests that probiotics are effective for preventing CDAD (NNTB = 42 patients, 95% CI 32 to 58). Our post hoc subgroup analyses to explore heterogeneity indicated that probiotics are effective among trials with a CDAD baseline risk >5% (NNTB = 12; moderate certainty evidence), but not among trials with a baseline risk ≤5% (low to moderate certainty evidence). Although adverse effects were reported among 32 included trials, there were more adverse events among patients in the control groups. The short-term use of probiotics appears to be safe and effective when used along with antibiotics in patients who are not immunocompromised or severely debilitated. Despite the need for further research, hospitalized patients, particularly those at high risk of CDAD, should be informed of the potential benefits and harms of probiotics.

Gleaning Insights from Fecal Microbiota Transplantation and Probiotic Studies for the Rational Design of Combination Microbial Therapies

Beneficial microorganisms hold promise for the treatment of numerous gastrointestinal diseases. The transfer of whole microbiota via fecal transplantation has already been shown to ameliorate the severity of diseases such as Clostridium difficile infection, inflammatory bowel disease, and others. However, the exact mechanisms of fecal microbiota transplant efficacy and the particular strains conferring this benefit are still unclear. Rationally designed combinations of microbial preparations may enable more efficient and effective treatment approaches tailored to particular diseases. Here we use an infectious disease, C. difficile infection, and an inflammatory disorder, the inflammatory bowel disease ulcerative colitis, as examples to facilitate the discussion of how microbial therapy might be rationally designed for specific gastrointestinal diseases. Fecal microbiota transplantation has already shown some efficacy in the treatment of both these disorders; detailed comparisons of studies evaluating commensal and probiotic organisms in the context of these disparate gastrointestinal diseases may shed light on potential protective mechanisms and elucidate how future microbial therapies can be tailored to particular diseases.

Vitamin D/VDR, Probiotics, and Gastrointestinal Diseases

Vitamin D is an important factor in regulating inflammation, immune responses, and carcinoma inhibition via action of its receptor, vitamin D receptor (VDR). Recent studies have demonstrated the role of vitamin D/VDR in regulating host-bacterial interactions. Probiotics are beneficial bacteria with the power of supporting or favoring life on the host. In the current review, we will discuss the recent progress on the roles of vitamin D/VDR in gut microbiome and inflammation. We will summarize evidence of probiotics in modulating vitamin D/VDR and balancing gut microbiota in health and gastrointestinal diseases. Moreover, we will review the clinical application of probiotics in prevention and therapy of IBD or colon cancer. Despite of the gains, there remain several barriers to advocate broad use of probiotics in clinical therapy. We will also discuss the limits and future direction in scientific understanding of probiotics, vitamin D/VDR, and host responses.

Lactobacillus probiotics in the prevention of diarrhea associated with Clostridium difficile: a systematic review and Bayesian hierarchical meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent meta-analyses of the efficacy of probiotics for preventing diarrhea associated with Clostridium difficile have concluded there is a large effect favouring probiotics. We reexamined this evidence, which contradicts the results of a more recent large randomized controlled trial that found no benefit of Lactobacillus probiotics for preventing C. difficile-associated diarrhea.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the efficacy of treatment with Lactobacillus probiotics for preventing nosocomial C. difficile-associated diarrhea in adults and carried out a meta-analysis using a Bayesian hierarchical model. We used credibility analysis and meta-regression to characterize the heterogeneity between studies.

RESULTS

Ten studies met our inclusion criteria. The pooled risk ratio was highly statistically significant, at 0.25 (95% credible interval 0.08-0.47). However, the 95% prediction interval for the risk ratio in a future study, 0.02-1.34, was wider than the credible interval, owing to heterogeneity between studies. Furthermore, a credibility analysis showed that the strength of the evidence was weaker than the observed number of cases of C. difficile-associated diarrhea across studies would suggest. Meta-regression suggested that the beneficial effect of probiotics was more likely to be reported in studies with an increased risk of C. difficile-associated diarrhea in the control group, although this association was not statistically significant.

INTERPRETATION

Accounting for between-study heterogeneity showed that there is considerable uncertainty regarding the apparently large efficacy estimate associated with Lactobacillus probiotic treatment in preventing C. difficile-associated diarrhea. Most studies to date have been carried out in populations with a low risk of C. difficile-associated diarrhea, such that the evidence is inconclusive and inadequate to support a policy concerning routine use of probiotics in to prevent this condition.

Anti-infective activities of lactobacillus strains in the human intestinal microbiota: from probiotics to gastrointestinal anti-infectious biotherapeutic agents

A vast and diverse array of microbial species displaying great phylogenic, genomic, and metabolic diversity have colonized the gastrointestinal tract. Resident microbes play a beneficial role by regulating the intestinal immune system, stimulating the maturation of host tissues, and playing a variety of roles in nutrition and in host resistance to gastric and enteric bacterial pathogens. The mechanisms by which the resident microbial species combat gastrointestinal pathogens are complex and include competitive metabolic interactions and the production of antimicrobial molecules. The human intestinal microbiota is a source from which Lactobacillus probiotic strains have often been isolated. Only six probiotic Lactobacillus strains isolated from human intestinal microbiota, i.e., L. rhamnosus GG, L. casei Shirota YIT9029, L. casei DN-114 001, L. johnsonii NCC 533, L. acidophilus LB, and L. reuteri DSM 17938, have been well characterized with regard to their potential antimicrobial effects against the major gastric and enteric bacterial pathogens and rotavirus. In this review, we describe the current knowledge concerning the experimental antibacterial activities, including antibiotic-like and cell-regulating activities, and therapeutic effects demonstrated in well-conducted, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials of these probiotic Lactobacillus strains. What is known about the antimicrobial activities supported by the molecules secreted by such probiotic Lactobacillus strains suggests that they constitute a promising new source for the development of innovative anti-infectious agents that act luminally and intracellularly in the gastrointestinal tract.

Probiotics are effective at preventing Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is the leading cause of antibiotic-associated diarrhea. CDI has increased in incidence and severity over the past decade, and is a growing worldwide health problem associated with substantial health care costs and significant morbidity and mortality. This meta-analysis examines the impact of probiotics on the incidence of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) among children and adults, in both hospital and outpatient settings.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of all published randomized control trials (RCTs) assessing the use of probiotics in the prevention of CDAD in patients receiving antibiotic therapy was conducted, and the incidence of CDAD was analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-six RCTs involving 7,957 patients were analyzed. Probiotic use significantly reduced the risk of developing CDAD by 60.5% (relative risk [RR] =0.395; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.294-0.531; P<0.001). Probiotics proved beneficial in both adults and children (59.5% and 65.9% reduction), especially among hospitalized patients. Lactobacillus, Saccharomyces, and a mixture of probiotics were all beneficial in reducing the risk of developing CDAD (63.7%, 58.5%, and 58.2% reduction).

CONCLUSION

Probiotic supplementation is associated with a significant reduction in the risk of developing CDAD in patients receiving antibiotics. Additional studies are required to determine the optimal dose and strain of probiotic.

Probiotics for the Primary and Secondary Prevention of C. difficile Infections: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

Clostridium difficile infections are a global clinical concern and are one of the leading causes of nosocomial outbreaks. Preventing these infections has benefited from multidisciplinary infection control strategies and new antibiotics, but the problem persists. Probiotics are effective in preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhea and may also be a beneficial strategy for C. difficile infections, but randomized controlled trials are scarce. This meta-analysis pools 21 randomized, controlled trials for primary prevention of C. difficile infections (CDI) and four trials for secondary prevention of C. difficile recurrences and assesses the efficacy of specific probiotic strains. Four probiotics significantly improved primary CDI prevention: (Saccharomyces boulardii, Lactobacillus casei DN114001, a mixture of L. acidophilus and Bifidobacterium bifidum, and a mixture of L. acidophilus, L. casei and L. rhamnosus). None of the tested probiotics significantly improved secondary prevention of CDI. More confirmatory randomized trials are needed to establish if probiotics are useful for preventing C. difficile infections.

Probiotics, prebiotics and the gastrointestinal tract in health and disease

The microbiome located in the human gastrointestinal tract (GIT) comprises the largest community (diverse and dense) of bacteria, and in conjunction with a conducive internal milieu, promotes the development of regulated pro- and anti-inflammatory signals within the GIT that promotes immunological and metabolic tolerance. In addition, host-microbial interactions govern GIT inflammation and provide cues for upholding metabolic regulation in both the host and microbes. Failure to regulate inflammatory responses can increase the risk of developing inflammatory conditions in the GIT. Here, we review clinical studies regarding the efficacy of probiotics/prebiotics and the role they may have in restoring host metabolic homeostasis by rescuing the inflammatory response. The clinical studies reviewed included functional constipation, antibiotic-associated diarrhoea, Clostridium difficile diarrhoea, infectious diarrhoea/gastroenteritis, irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel diseases and necrotizing enterocolitis. We have demonstrated that there was an overall reduction in risk when probiotics were administered over placebo in the majority of GIT inflammatory conditions. The effect size of a cumulative reduction in relative risk for the GIT conditions/diseases investigated was 0.65 (0.61-0.70) (z = 13.3); p < 0.0001 that is an average reduction in risk of 35 % in favour of probiotics. We also progress a hypothesis that the GIT comprises numerous micro-axes (e.g. mucus secretion, Th1/Th2 balance) that are in operational homeostasis; hence probiotics and prebiotics may have a significant pharmacobiotic regulatory role in maintaining host GIT homeostasis in disease states partially through reactive oxygen species signalling.

Survey and Systematic Literature Review of Probiotics Stocked in Academic Medical Centers within the United States

BACKGROUND

Probiotics have a wide variation in their effectiveness in preventing or treating conditions due to the varying beneficial effects of specific probiotic strains. In other words, there is no "generic equivalency" between different probiotic species. However, it is has been noted that many practitioners consider probiotics in generic terms and may not realize the impact of these differences between probiotics.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to identify probiotics used in US academic medical centers and to determine whether those probiotics were supported by a reliable evidence base.

METHODS

A phone survey of 126 inpatient pharmacies in US academic medical centers was conducted to determine which probiotics were stocked. A systematic search was conducted to identify relevant studies that were then critically evaluated to determine whether the identified probiotics are supported by a reliable evidence base.

RESULTS

There was a 90.5% (114/126) response rate of academic medical centers that were contacted through the phone survey. Ten probiotic products were identified through the phone survey. The probiotic most often stocked in academic medical centers was Culturelle (27.2%) followed by Lactinex (25.4%). The systematic search identified evidence that evaluated Culturelle, Florastor, Lactinex, and VSL #3. Of those 4 probiotics, none were supported by a strong evidence base. However, the results suggested that both Culturelle and Florastor appear to be supported by more evidence compared to other probiotics.

CONCLUSION

A majority of academic medical centers did not stock a probiotic that was supported by a reliable evidence base.

Probiotics for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea and Clostridium difficile infection among hospitalized patients: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) and Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) are associated with high morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Probiotics may mitigate the existing disease burden. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of co-administration of probiotics with antibiotics in preventing these adverse outcomes in adult inpatients.

METHODS

Systematic searches of MEDLINE (1946 to May 2012), Embase (1980 to May 2012), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were undertaken on May 31, 2012, to identify relevant publications. We searched for randomized controlled trials, published in English, of adult inpatients who were receiving antibiotics and who were randomly assigned to co-administration of probiotics or usual care, with or without the use of placebo. Studies were included if they reported on AAD or CDI (or both) as outcomes. Data for predetermined criteria evaluating study characteristics, methods, and risk of bias were extracted. Trials were given a global rating of good, fair, or poor by at least 2 reviewers. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model, and pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Sixteen trials met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Four studies were of good quality, 5 were of fair quality, and 7 were of poor quality. Pooled analyses revealed significant reductions in the risks of AAD (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.79) and CDI (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.61) among patients randomly assigned to co-administration of probiotics. The number needed to treat for benefit was 11 (95% CI 8 to 20) for AAD and 14 (95% CI 9 to 50) for CDI. With subgroup analysis, significant reductions in rates of both AAD and CDI were retained in the subgroups of good-quality trials, the trials assessing a primarily Lactobacillus-based probiotic formulation, and the trials for which the follow-up period was less than 4 weeks.

INTERPRETATION

Probiotics used concurrently with antibiotics reduce the risk of AAD and CDI.

A multicentre randomised controlled trial evaluating lactobacilli and bifidobacteria in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in older people admitted to hospital: the PLACIDE study protocol

Background

Antibiotic associated diarrhoea complicates 5–39% of courses of antibiotic treatment. Major risk factors are increased age and admission to hospital. Of particular importance is C. difficile associated diarrhoea which occurs in about 4% of antibiotic courses and may result in severe illness, death and high healthcare costs. The emergence of the more virulent 027 strain of C. difficile has further heightened concerns. Probiotics may prevent antibiotic associated diarrhoea by several mechanisms including colonization resistance through maintaining a healthy gut flora.

Methods

This study aims to test the hypothesis that administration of a probiotic comprising two strains of lactobacilli and two strains of bifidobacteria alongside antibiotic treatment prevents antibiotic associated diarrhoea. We have designed a prospective, parallel group trial where people aged 65 years or more admitted to hospital and receiving one or more antibiotics are randomly allocated to receive either one capsule of the probiotic or a matching placebo daily for 21 days. The primary outcomes are the frequency of antibiotic associated and C. difficile diarrhoea during 8–12 weeks follow-up. To directly inform routine clinical practice, we will recruit a sufficient number of patients to demonstrate a 50% reduction in the frequency of C. difficile diarrhoea with a power of 80%. To maximize the generalizability of our findings and in view of the well-established safety record of probiotics, we will recruit a broad range of medical and surgical in-patients from two different health regions within the UK.

Discussion

Antibiotic associated diarrhoea constitutes a significant health burden. In particular, current measures to prevent and control C. difficile diarrhoea are expensive and disrupt clinical care. This trial may have considerable significance for the prevention of antibiotic associated diarrhoea in hospitals.

Trial registration

International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register ISRCTN70017204.

Milk, milk products, and disease free health: an updated overview

The cow and its milk have been held sacred in the world since the dawn of human civilization. Indian ancient Vedic texts describe the virtues of milk and dairy products, as is authenticated by modern scientific principles and proofs. Therefore, milk has been considered as one of the most natural and highly nutritive part of a daily balanced diet. Currently, the integration of advanced scientific knowledge with traditional information is gaining incredible momentum toward developing the concept of potential therapeutic foods. Furthermore, new advances toward understanding the therapeutic roles of milk and milk products have also given a new impetus for unraveling the age old secrets of milk. At present, the best-known examples of therapeutic foods are fermented milk products containing health promoting probiotic bacteria. In the present article, we have tried to review the various aspects of the therapeutic nature of milk and fermented dairy products in a highly up-dated manner, and offer an in-depth insight into the development of targeted therapeutic future foods as per the requirements of consumers.

Probiotics for prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea and Clostridium difficile-associated disease in hospitalized adults--a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

A serious complication associated with the use of most antibiotics is antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD). The purpose of this article is to report findings from a meta-analysis of available studies on adult hospitalized populations to evaluate efficacy of probiotics for prevention of AAD and Clostridium difficile-associated disease (CDAD).

DATA SOURCES

A comprehensive, systematic search was conducted to identify all relevant studies on probiotic efficacy for prevention of AAD and CDAD. Data synthesis was done using MAStARI software from the Joanna Briggs Institute (University of Adelaide, Australia).

CONCLUSIONS

AAD affects one in five people on antibiotics. Risk factors for the development of AAD include the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics and host factors such as age, health status, hospitalization status, and exposure to nosocomial pathogens. About a third of AAD cases have CDAD. Meta-analysis showed that administration of probiotics led to a statistically significant relative risk reduction of 44% for AAD and 71% for CDAD.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Extended hospital stays, readmissions, and higher hospital costs are just some of the consequences of ADD and CDAD. Strategies currently used include discontinuing or changing the inciting antibiotic, restricting high-risk antibiotics, and encouraging the use of antibiotics based on sensitivity reports. Healthcare spending, morbidity, and mortality can potentially be reduced considerably by reducing the occurrence of ADD and CDAD by administering prophylaxis with probiotics concurrently with antibiotics.

Effect of probiotic Lactobacillus (Lacidofil® cap) for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study

Antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) is a common complication of antibiotic use. There is growing interest in probiotics for the treatment of AAD and Clostridium difficile infection because of the wide availability of probiotics. The aim of this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial was to assess the efficacy of probiotic Lactobacillus (Lacidofil® cap) for the prevention of AAD in adults. From September 2008 to November 2009, a total of 214 patients with respiratory tract infection who had begun receiving antibiotics were randomized to receive Lactobacillus (Lacidofil® cap) or placebo for 14 days. Patients recorded bowel frequency and stool consistency daily for 14 days. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who developed AAD within 14 days of enrollment. AAD developed in 4 (3.9%) of 103 patients in the Lactobacillus group and in 8 (7.2%) of 111 patients in the placebo group (P=0.44). However, the Lactobacillus group showed lower change in bowel frequency and consistency (50/103, 48.5%) than the placebo group (35/111, 31.5%) (P=0.01). Although the Lacidofil® cap does not reduce the rate of occurrence of AAD in adult patients with respiratory tract infection who have taken antibiotics, the Lactobacillus group maintains their bowel habits to a greater extent than the placebo group.

Role of Lactobacillus in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea: a meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of a Lactobacillus probiotic single-agent regimen in preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD).

DESIGN

Meta-analysis of 10 randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trials. Patients. A total of 1862 pediatric and adult patients who received a Lactobacillus single-agent regimen or placebo for the prevention of AAD.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from inception through May 2008 by two investigators independently using the following key words: probiotic, Lactobacillus, antibiotic-associated diarrhea. Full reports published in English were included if the studies were randomized, blinded, and placebo-controlled trials that evaluated the efficacy of Lactobacillus single-agent regimens versus placebo in the prevention of AAD. Bibliographies of recent review articles and systematic reviews were hand searched. Quality of the studies was assessed by using the Jadad scoring system. Number of subjects, age, Lactobacillus regimen, follow-up period, and occurrence of AAD were extracted into a standardized data collection form. Overall impact of Lactobacillus on AAD was compared with placebo by using a random-effects model. Ten studies with a total of 1862 patients (50.4% male) met all criteria. Six studies included patients aged 18 years or older, whereas four included patients younger than 18 years (range 2 wks-14 yrs). Jadad scores ranged from 2-5 (out of 5). The total daily dose of Lactobacillus ranged from 2 x 10(9)-4 x 10(10) colony-forming units and was administered throughout the entire antibiotic treatment (5-14 days) for all patients. The follow-up period varied from 2 days-3 months after the end of the probiotic regimen. The combined risk ratio (RR) of developing AAD was significantly lower with Lactobacillus compared with placebo (RR 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-0.67). In a subgroup analysis, this held true for adults but not pediatric patients (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.08-0.75 and RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.18-1.08, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Administration of a Lactobacillus single-agent regimen as a prophylactic agent during antibiotic treatment reduced the risk of developing AAD compared with placebo in adults but not pediatric patients.

Probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics

According to the German definition, probiotics are defined viable microorganisms, sufficient amounts of which reach the intestine in an active state and thus exert positive health effects. Numerous probiotic microorganisms (e.g. Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, L. reuteri, bifidobacteria and certain strains of L. casei or the L. acidophilus-group) are used in probiotic food, particularly fermented milk products, or have been investigated--as well as Escherichia coli strain Nissle 1917, certain enterococci (Enterococcus faecium SF68) and the probiotic yeast Saccharomyces boulardii--with regard to their medicinal use. Among the numerous purported health benefits attributed to probiotic bacteria, the (transient) modulation of the intestinal microflora of the host and the capacity to interact with the immune system directly or mediated by the autochthonous microflora, are basic mechanisms. They are supported by an increasing number of in vitro and in vivo experiments using conventional and molecular biologic methods. In addition to these, a limited number of randomized, well-controlled human intervention trials have been reported. Well-established probiotic effects are: 1. Prevention and/or reduction of duration and complaints of rotavirus-induced or antibiotic-associated diarrhea as well as alleviation of complaints due to lactose intolerance. 2. Reduction of the concentration of cancer-promoting enzymes and/or putrefactive (bacterial) metabolites in the gut. 3. Prevention and alleviation of unspecific and irregular complaints of the gastrointestinal tracts in healthy people. 4. Beneficial effects on microbial aberrancies, inflammation and other complaints in connection with: inflammatory diseases of the gastrointestinal tract, Helicobacter pylori infection or bacterial overgrowth. 5. Normalization of passing stool and stool consistency in subjects suffering from obstipation or an irritable colon. 6. Prevention or alleviation of allergies and atopic diseases in infants. 7. Prevention of respiratory tract infections (common cold, influenza) and other infectious diseases as well as treatment of urogenital infections. Insufficient or at most preliminary evidence exists with respect to cancer prevention, a so-called hypocholesterolemic effect, improvement of the mouth flora and caries prevention or prevention or therapy of ischemic heart diseases or amelioration of autoimmune diseases (e.g. arthritis). A prebiotic is "a selectively fermented ingredient that allows specific changes, both in the composition and/or activity in the gastrointestinal microflora that confers benefits upon host well being and health", whereas synergistic combinations of pro- and prebiotics are called synbiotics. Today, only bifidogenic, non-digestible oligosaccharides (particularly inulin, its hydrolysis product oligofructose, and (trans)galactooligosaccharides), fulfill all the criteria for prebiotic classification. They are dietary fibers with a well-established positive impact on the intestinal microflora. Other health effects of prebiotics (prevention of diarrhoea or obstipation, modulation of the metabolism of the intestinal flora, cancer prevention, positive effects on lipid metabolism, stimulation of mineral adsorption and immunomodulatory properties) are indirect, i.e. mediated by the intestinal microflora, and therefore less-well proven. In the last years, successful attempts have been reported to make infant formula more breast milk-like by the addition of fructo- and (primarily) galactooligosaccharides.

Eukaryotic-microbiota crosstalk: potential mechanisms for health benefits of prebiotics and probiotics

The ability to link dietary consumption of prebiotic food ingredients and probiotic microorganisms to health benefits rests, in part, on our ability to identify both the extent to which these factors alter human microbiome activity and/or structure and the ability to engage eukaryotic cells necessary to transduce signals originating from the microbiome. The human microbiome consists of bacterial, archaeal, and fungal components that reside in mucosal surfaces of the gut, the airways, and the urogenital tract. Characterization of the symbiotic nature of the relationship between eukaryotic cells and the bacterial and archaeal components of the microbiota has revealed significant contributions in energy balance, bowel function, immunologic function, sensory perception, glycemic control, and blood pressure regulation. Elucidating the complex interactions between the microbiota and their associated epithelial, immune, and neural cells may provide mechanistic insights and a rational basis for our belief that dietary consumption of probiotic microorganisms and prebiotics produces health benefits.

Does eating yogurt prevent antibiotic-associated diarrhoea? A placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial in general practice

BACKGROUND

Probiotic capsules have been shown to reduce the incidence of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in a number of settings. If probiotic yogurt were equally efficacious then it would provide a simple and cost-effective means of preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhoea.

AIM

To investigate whether eating live bio yogurt at the time of taking oral antibiotics can prevent antibiotic-associated diarrhoea.

DESIGN OF STUDY

This study was a three-arm (bio yogurt, commercial yogurt, no yogurt) randomised controlled trial with double blinding between the two yogurt arms.

SETTING

A single primary care general practice surgery in Hingham, Norfolk. The study population included all ages except babies.

METHOD

Patients aged over 1 year who required a 1-week course of antibiotics were included in the study. There was complete follow up for 369 patients. The intervention was the consumption of 150 ml of live strawberry-flavoured yogurt for 12 days, starting on the first day of taking the antibiotic. Diarrhoea was defined as 'three or more loose stools per day over at least 2 consecutive days' within 12 days of starting the antibiotics.

RESULTS

Of the 120 patients in the no-yogurt group, 17 (14%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 9.0 to 21.5) developed diarrhoea. Of the 118 given commercial yogurt, 13 (11%, 95% CI = 6.6 to 17.9) developed diarrhoea; nine of the 131 patients (7%; 95% CI = 3.7 to 12.5) given bio yogurt developed diarrhoea (P = 0.17).

CONCLUSION

Overall, this study failed to demonstrate that yogurt has any effect on antibiotic-associated diarrhoea.

Effect of a fermented milk combining Lactobacillus acidophilus Cl1285 and Lactobacillus casei in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic-associated diarrhea is an important problem in hospitalized patients. The use of probiotics is gaining interest in the scientific community as a potential measure to prevent this complication. The main objective of the present study was to assess the efficacy and safety of a fermented milk combining Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactobacillus casei that is widely available in Canada, in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea.

METHODS

In this double-blind, randomized study, hospitalized patients were randomly assigned to receive either a lactobacilli-fermented milk or a placebo on a daily basis.

RESULTS

Among 89 randomized patients, antibiotic-associated diarrhea occurred in seven of 44 patients (15.9%) in the lactobacilli group and in 16 of 45 patients (35.6%) in the placebo group (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.125 to 0.944; P=0.05). The median hospitalization duration was eight days in the lactobacilli group, compared with 10 days in the placebo group (P=0.09). Overall, the lactobacilli-fermented milk was well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

The daily administration of a lactobacilli-fermented milk was safe and effective in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea in hospitalized patients.

Probiotics for the prevention of pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics alter the microbial balance within the gastrointestinal tract. Probiotics may prevent antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) via restoration of the gut microflora. Antibiotics are prescribed frequently in children and AAD is common in this population.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and adverse effects of probiotics (any specified strain or dose) for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea in children. To assess adverse events associated with the use of probiotics when co-administered with antibiotics in children.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL , AMED, and the Web of Science (inception to August 2006) were searched along with specialized registers including the Cochrane IBD/FBD Review Group, CISCOM, Chalmers PedCAM Research Register and trial registries from inception to 2005. Letters were sent to authors of included trials, nutra/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 hand searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized, parallel, controlled (placebo, active, or no treatment) trials comparing co-administered probiotics with antibiotics for the prevention of diarrhea secondary to antibiotic use in children (0 to 18 years).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Methodological quality assessment and data extraction were conducted independently by two authors (BCJ, AS). Dichotomous data (incidence of diarrhea, adverse events) were combined using pooled relative risks, and continuous data (mean duration of diarrhea, mean daily stool frequency) as weighted mean differences, along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Adverse events were summarized using risk difference. For overall pooled results on the incidence of diarrhea, a priori sensitivity analyses included per protocol versus intention to treat, random versus fixed effects, and methodological quality criterion. Subgroup analysis were conducted on probiotic strain, dose, definition of antibiotic-associated diarrhea, and antibiotic agent.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. Trials included treatment with either Lactobacilli spp., Bifidobacterium spp., Streptococcus spp., or Saccharomyces boulardii alone or in combination. Six studies used a single strain probiotic agent and four combined two probiotic strains. The per protocol analysis for 9/10 trials reporting on the incidence of diarrhea show statistically significant results favouring probiotics over active/non active controls (RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.74). However, intention to treat analysis showed non-significant results overall (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.50 to 1.63). Five of ten trials monitored for adverse events (n = 647); none reported a serious adverse event.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Probiotics show promise for the prevention of pediatric AAD. While per protocol analysis yields treatment effect estimates that are both statistically and clinically significant, as does analysis of high quality studies, the estimate from the intention to treat analysis was not statistically significant. Future studies should involve probiotic strains and doses with the most promising evidence (e.g., Lactobacillus GG, Lactobacillus sporogenes, Saccharomyces boulardii at 5 to 40 billion colony forming units/day). Research done to date does not permit determination of the effect of age (e.g., infant versus older children) or antibiotic duration (e.g., 5 days versus 10 days). Future trials would benefit from a validated primary outcome measure for antibiotic-associated diarrhea that is sensitive to change and reflects what treatment effect clinicians, parents, and children consider important. The current data are promising, but it is premature to routinely recommend probiotics for the prevention of pediatric AAD.

Do probiotics have a therapeutic role in gastroenterology?

Several hundred species of bacteria inhabit the gut, and affect its cell biology, morphology and homeostasis. Many bacteria are however potential pathogens, especially if the integrity of the epithelial barrier is physically or functionally breached. Conversely, the interaction between host and commensal microbes can confer important health benefits. This has led to commercial and public interest in 'probiotics', live microbes principally taken as food supplements. Might probiotics also be used in disease therapy Experimental evidence that probiotics modulate gut physiology, particularly barrier integrity and immunological function, underpins exciting new gastroenterological research. We discuss below the scientific basis for probiotic effects and present a critical perspective for their use in relation to gastrointestinal disease.

Nutritional therapy and infectious diseases: a two-edged sword

The benefits and risks of nutritional therapies in the prevention and management of infectious diseases in the developed world are reviewed. There is strong evidence that early enteral feeding of patients prevents infections in a variety of traumatic and surgical illnesses. There is, however, little support for similar early feeding in medical illnesses. Parenteral nutrition increases the risk of infection when compared to enteral feeding or delayed nutrition. The use of gastric feedings appears to be as safe and effective as small bowel feedings. Dietary supplementation with glutamine appears to lower the risk of post-surgical infections and the ingestion of cranberry products has value in preventing urinary tract infections in women.

Probiotics for pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea: a meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic treatment is known to disturb gastrointestinal microflora, which results in a range of clinical symptoms--most notably, diarrhea. This is especially important in children, for whom antibiotics are prescribed frequently. Although meta-analyses have been conducted to evaluate the ability of probiotics to prevent antibiotic-induced diarrhea in the general population, little is known about which probiotic strains and doses might be of most benefit to children. Our objective in this study was to assess the efficacy of probiotics (of any specified strain or dose) for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea in children and to assess adverse events associated with the use of probiotics when coadministered with antibiotics to children.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed of the major electronic databases (e.g., CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED) from their inception to January 2005. We also contacted experts and searched registries and meeting abstracts for additional relevant articles. Randomized controlled trials that compared probiotic treatment with placebo or no treatment, involving pediatric subjects less than 19 years of age were included. Two reviewers independently applied eligibility criteria and assessed the studies for methodological quality. Data were independently extracted by 2 reviewers and analyzed via the standard Cochrane methodology.

RESULTS

Six studies were included (total n = 707 patients). The combined results, analyzed with a per-protocol method that reported on the incidence of diarrhea during antibiotic treatment, showed significant benefit for the use of probiotics over placebo (relative risk [RR] 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-0.75, Iota2 = 70.1%). In contrast, results from intention-to-treat analysis were nonsignificant overall (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.64-1.61). Subgroup analysis on 4 studies that provided at least 5 billion single-strain colony-forming units (CFUs) daily (range 5.5-40 x 10(9) Lactobacillus GG, L. sporogens or Saccharomyces boulardii) showed strong evidence with narrow CIs for the preventative effects of probiotics for antibiotic-associated diarrhea (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.25-0.53, Iota2 = 3.5%). No serious adverse events were reported.

INTERPRETATION

The potential protective effects of probiotics to prevent antibiotic-associated diarrhea in children do not withstand intention-to-treat analysis. Before routine use is recommended, further studies (with limited losses of subjects to follow-up) are merited. Trials should involve those probiotic strains and doses with the most promising evidence (i.e., Lactobacillus GG, L. sporogens or S. boulardii at 5-40 x 10(9) CFUs daily).

Probiotics in the prevention and treatment of gastrointestinal infections

Probiotics have been studied in a variety of GI infections, and are an appealing concept given their favorable safety profiles. Several placebo-controlled trials indicated that lactobacilli have a suppressive effect on H pylori infection. Although some studies reported improvement in H pylori eradication, others failed to confirm this. Controlled trials support the use of Lactobacillus GG and S boulardii for the prevention of AAD, and have demonstrated the effectiveness of S boulardii as adjunctive therapy for RCDAD. Several placebo-controlled trials showed a reduction in the severity and duration of acute diarrhea in children with use of Lactobacillus GG. Studies of probiotics for the prevention of traveler's diarrhea yielded conflicting results, and their routine use cannot be recommended in this setting. Preliminary evidence suggests a potential role for reducing secondary pancreatic infections, although conclusive evidence is not available at this time. Additional clinical trials are indicated to define the role of probiotics further before wide-spread use can be recommended.

Probiotic therapy for the prevention and treatment of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The recent increase in the number and severity of cases of nosocomial Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) has prompted interest in the use of probiotics for the prevention and treatment of this disease. We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to assess the effectiveness of probiotic therapy.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, INAHTA, HEN and Cochrane Collaboration databases to identify trials in which the prevention or treatment of CDAD with probiotic therapy was the primary or secondary outcome. We extracted data on the number of patients randomly assigned to receive probiotic or placebo, the number of patients with CDAD, the type of probiotic, criteria for diagnosing CDAD, persistence of infection after treatment, compliance and adverse effects.

RESULTS

We identified 4 eligible studies in which prevention (n = 1) or treatment (n = 3) of CDAD was the primary outcome. The benefit of probiotic therapy seen in 2 of the studies was restricted to subgroups characterized by severe CDAD and increased use of vancomycin. The remaining 2 studies were too methodologically flawed for us to draw meaningful conclusions. We also identified 4 trials in which prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea with probiotics was the primary outcome and prevention of CDAD a secondary outcome. These studies were limited primarily by too few CDAD cases and provided no evidence of effective prophylaxis. Overall, heterogeneity in choice and dose of probiotic and in criteria for diagnosing CDAD makes it difficult to synthesize information from the 8 studies.

INTERPRETATION

Studies conducted to date provide insufficient evidence for the routine clinical use of probiotics to prevent or treat CDAD. Better designed and larger studies are needed.

Antagonistic activities of lactobacilli and bifidobacteria against microbial pathogens

The gastrointestinal tract is a complex ecosystem that associates a resident microbiota and cells of various phenotypes lining the epithelial wall expressing complex metabolic activities. The resident microbiota in the digestive tract is a heterogeneous microbial ecosystem containing up to 1 x 10(14) colony-forming units (CFUs) of bacteria. The intestinal microbiota plays an important role in normal gut function and maintaining host health. The host is protected from attack by potentially harmful microbial microorganisms by the physical and chemical barriers created by the gastrointestinal epithelium. The cells lining the gastrointestinal epithelium and the resident microbiota are two partners that properly and/or synergistically function to promote an efficient host system of defence. The gastrointestinal cells that make up the epithelium, provide a physical barrier that protects the host against the unwanted intrusion of microorganisms into the gastrointestinal microbiota, and against the penetration of harmful microorganisms which usurp the cellular molecules and signalling pathways of the host to become pathogenic. One of the basic physiological functions of the resident microbiota is that it functions as a microbial barrier against microbial pathogens. The mechanisms by which the species of the microbiota exert this barrier effect remain largely to be determined. There is increasing evidence that lactobacilli and bifidobacteria, which inhabit the gastrointestinal microbiota, develop antimicrobial activities that participate in the host's gastrointestinal system of defence. The objective of this review is to analyze the in vitro and in vivo experimental and clinical studies in which the antimicrobial activities of selected lactobacilli and bifidobacteria strains have been documented.

Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in adults

Clostridium difficile is the most important cause of nosocomial diarrhea in adults. Illness may range from mild watery diarrhea to life-threatening colitis. An antecedent disruption of the normal colonic flora followed by exposure to a toxigenic strain of C. difficile are necessary first steps in the pathogenesis of disease. Diagnosis is based primarily on the detection of C. difficile toxin A or toxin B. First-line treatment is with oral metronidazole therapy. Treatment with oral vancomycin therapy should be reserved for patients who have contraindications or intolerance to metronidazole or who fail to respond to first-line therapy.

Diarrhées associées aux antibiotiques chez le sujet âgé

PURPOSE

Most of the antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) cases result from a transient disturbance in the function of the normal intestinal flora and are spontaneously solved when discontinuing the antibacterial therapy. However, a mild diarrhea lasting several days may induce a dehydration or worsen a denutrition in frail elderly people.

CURRENT KNOWLEDGE AND KEY POINTS

The incidence of AAD varies between 5 and 25% depending on the concerned antibiotic. Only 10-20% of all AAD cases are caused by infection, especially with Clostridium difficile, for which advanced age is a major risk factor. The first biological exam to perform when severe AAD or in frail people is the detection of C. difficile toxins, especially in elderly patient treated with beta-lactam antibiotics. Nevertheless, other infectious organisms causing AAD may be considered, as Staphylococcus aureus when predominant in stool cultures from patients treated with fluoroquinolones or as Klebsiella oxytoca when isolated in bloody diarrhea from patients treated with ampicillin. Elevated fecal counts of Candida spp. found in patients treated with antibiotics is rather the consequence of therapy than the cause of AAD. The prevention of AAD is based on a rational antibiotic use to avoid endogenous selection of C. difficile and on the improvement of the hygiene measures to limit the exogenous transmission of the bacteria or related spores by spoiled hands.

FUTURE PROSPECTS

Simultaneous prescription of non-pathogenic living organisms, capable of re-establishing the equilibrium of the intestinal flora, should be better described, especially in elderly people, because of its important economic impact.

Potential uses of probiotics in clinical practice

Probiotics are defined as live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host. There is now mounting evidence that selected probiotic strains can provide health benefits to their human hosts. Numerous clinical trials show that certain strains can improve the outcome of intestinal infections by reducing the duration of diarrhea. Further investigations have shown benefits in reducing the recurrence of urogenital infections in women, while promising studies in cancer and allergies require research into the mechanisms of activity for particular strains and better-designed trials. At present, only a small percentage of physicians either know of probiotics or understand their potential applicability to patient care. Thus, probiotics are not yet part of the clinical arsenal for prevention and treatment of disease or maintenance of health. The establishment of accepted standards and guidelines, proposed by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Health Organization, represents a key step in ensuring that reliable products with suitable, informative health claims become available. Based upon the evidence to date, future advances with single- and multiple-strain therapies are on the horizon for the management of a number of debilitating and even fatal conditions.

Probiotics, antibiotic-associated diarrhoea and Clostridium difficile diarrhoea in humans

Probiotics are living organisms which, when ingested, have a beneficial therapeutic effect. Examples are bacteria, especially Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, and the yeast Saccharomyces boulardii. Controlled trials indicate a benefit of both of these in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea. Other less effective probiotics are Lactinex, Enterococcus faecium and bifidobacteria. In the difficult clinical problem of recurrent Clostridium difficile disease, S. boulardii as an adjunct to antibiotics has shown benefit in controlled trials. There is, however, less convincing evidence for the efficacy of Lactobacillus GG in this disease. Additional controlled trials and safety studies are needed before there can be a widespread endorsement of probiotics for these two conditions.

Gastrointestinal disorders and the critically ill. Clostridium difficile infection and pseudomembranous colitis

Clostridium difficile causes a spectrum of diseases ranging from diarrhoea to pseudomembranous colitis, primarily in the hospitalized elderly, although community-acquired infection is probably under-documented. Host factors are increasingly recognized as critical determinants of disease expression. Exposure to antibiotics, particularly those adversely affecting anaerobic gut flora, appears to create a niche which is exploited by C. difficile. Several retrospective and intervention studies have indicated that third-generation cephalosporins have a high propensity to induce C. difficile diarrhoea. Conversely, some broad-spectrum antibiotics, including ureidopenicillins (e.g. piperacillin-tazobactam) and ciprofloxacin, are less likely to induce C. difficile infection. Effective control of C. difficile in the hospital requires both antibiotic control and prevention of environmental seeding and bacterial spread. Epidemic C. difficile strains are widely distributed in the hospital environment, both as a cause and result of nosocomial diarrhoea. Current treatment options are antibiotic-based, which is less than ideal. Although many biotherapeutic approaches have been tried few have shown real benefit.

The place of probiotics in human intestinal infections

A number of studies have been carried out on the effect of several probiotic species on treatment and prevention of intestinal infections. The most commonly used microorganisms are lactic-acid producing bacteria such as lactobacilli and bifidobacteria belonging to the human normal microflora. In vitro and animal studies have shown that probiotic microorganisms interfere with the colonisation of Helicobacter pylori and of enteropathogenic microorganisms. In humans the significance is more uncertain. Clinically significant benefits of probiotics have been demonstrated in the treatment of rotavirus induced diarrhoea and of Saccharomyces boulardii in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD). In patients suffering from inflammatory bowel disease, several probiotic strains have been shown to be as effective as traditional medication in preventing relapses. Standardised and well performed studies are needed to elucidate further the mechanisms of action and the clinical significance of probiotics.

Clostridium difficile

Clostridium difficile is the most commonly identified infective cause of antibiotic associated diarrhoea. Broad spectrum antibiotics, are most frequently incriminated, although short (<3 day) antibiotic courses cause fewer episodes. Gold standard cell-culture based cytotoxin assays have been compared to rapid immunoassays, which are less effective, especially since toxin A negative, toxin B positive strains have been shown to be truly virulent. Details of colonization and adherence mechanisms have been revealed, and clonal spread has been demonstrated. The mainstay of treatment of C. difficile infection remains metronidazole. Justified fears over resistance are leading to development of alternative therapeutic strategies. These include a toxin binding polymer and ongoing biotherapy research. An antibody rise to toxin A during an episode of C. difficile diarrhoea protects against recurrence, and trials are in progress to investigate immunization: a toxoid vaccine which is immunogenic and safe in healthy volunteers shows promise for the future.

Nutrition support of the chronically critically ill patient

Providing nutrition and metabolic support to the CCI patient is based on the rational application of scientifically derived data and clinical experience with this unique population. Much of the data presented has been extrapolated from the critically ill ICU patients and the chronically ill hospitalized or nursing home patient, as there are limited data solely based on an experience with the CCI [table: see text] patient population. The key principles are: (1) primacy of protein provision and avoidance of overfeeding energy, (2) use of combined modality (enteral, parenteral, and oral) nutrition to meet needs as required, (3) use of adjunctive agents to promote nitrogen retention when needed, and (4) recognition of and adjustment for altered nutrient requirements (Table 3).