Is Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Effective in Preventing the Onset of Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhoea: A Systematic Review

Digestion ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason A. Hawrelak ◽  
Dawn L. Whitten ◽  
Stephen P. Myers
Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 2382
Author(s):  
Hauna Sheyholislami ◽  
Kristin L. Connor

Probiotic and prebiotic products have shown potential health benefits, including for the prevention of adverse pregnancy outcomes. The incidence of adverse effects in pregnant people and their infants associated with probiotic/prebiotic/synbiotic intake, however, remains unclear. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the evidence on adverse effects of maternal probiotic, prebiotic, and/or synbiotic supplementation during pregnancy and lactation and interpret the findings to help inform clinical decision-making and care of this population. A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Scientific databases were searched using pre-determined terms, and risk of bias assessments were conducted to determine study quality. Inclusion criteria were English language studies, human studies, access to full-text, and probiotic/prebiotic/synbiotic supplementation to the mother and not the infant. In total, 11/100 eligible studies reported adverse effects and were eligible for inclusion in quantitative analysis, and data were visualised in a GOfER diagram. Probiotic and prebiotic products are safe for use during pregnancy and lactation. One study reported increased risk of vaginal discharge and changes in stool consistency (relative risk [95% CI]: 3.67 [1.04, 13.0]) when administering Lactobacillus rhamnosus and L. reuteri. Adverse effects associated with probiotic and prebiotic use do not pose any serious health concerns to mother or infant. Our findings and knowledge translation visualisations provide healthcare professionals and consumers with information to make evidence-informed decisions about the use of pre- and probiotics.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (33) ◽  
pp. 4999-5016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ya-Ting Li ◽  
Hong Xu ◽  
Jian-Zhong Ye ◽  
Wen-Rui Wu ◽  
Ding Shi ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 128-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chunhong Xie ◽  
Jiajing Li ◽  
Kejia Wang ◽  
Qinqin Li ◽  
Daorong Chen

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 1-128
Author(s):  
Christopher C Butler ◽  
Eleri Owen-Jones ◽  
Mandy Lau ◽  
David Gillespie ◽  
Mark Lown ◽  
...  

Background Care homes are an increasingly important sector of care. Care home residents are particularly vulnerable to infections and are often prescribed antibiotics, driving antibiotic resistance. Probiotics may be a cheap and safe way to reduce antibiotic use. Efficacy and possible mechanisms of action are yet to be rigorously evaluated in this group. Objective The objective was to evaluate efficacy and explore mechanisms of action of a daily oral probiotic combination in reducing antibiotic use and infections in care home residents. Design This was a multicentre, parallel, individually randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, with qualitative evaluation and mechanistic studies. Setting A total of 310 care home residents were randomised from 23 UK care homes (from December 2016 to May 2018). Participants The participants were care home residents aged ≥ 65 years who were willing and able to give informed consent or, if they lacked capacity to consent, had a consultee to advise about participation on their behalf. Intervention A daily capsule containing an oral probiotic combination of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis BB-12 (n = 155) or matched placebo (n = 155) for up to 1 year. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was cumulative systemic antibiotic administration days for all-cause infections. Secondary outcomes included incidence and duration of infections, antibiotic-associated diarrhoea, quality of life, hospitalisations and the detection of resistant Enterobacterales cultured from stool samples (not exclusively). Methods Participants were randomised (1 : 1) to receive capsules containing probiotic or matched placebo. Minimisation was implemented for recruiting care home and care home resident sex. Care home residents were followed up for 12 months with a review by a research nurse at 3 months and at 6–12 months post randomisation. Care home residents, consultees, care home staff and all members of the trial team, including assessors and statisticians, were blinded to group allocation. Results Care home residents who were randomised to probiotic had a mean 12.9 cumulative systemic antibiotic administration days (standard error 1.49 days) (n = 152) and care home residents randomised to placebo had a mean 12.0 cumulative systemic antibiotic administration days (standard error 1.50 days) (n = 153) (adjusted incidence rate ratio = 1.13, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 1.63; p = 0.495). There was no evidence of any beneficial effects on incidence and duration of infections, antibiotic-associated diarrhoea, quality of life, hospitalisations, the detection of resistant Enterobacterales cultured from stool samples or other secondary outcomes. There was no evidence that this probiotic combination improved blood immune cell numbers, subtypes or responses to seasonal influenza vaccination. Conclusions Care home residents did not benefit from daily consumption of a combination of the probiotics Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis BB-12 to reduce antibiotic consumption. Limitations Limitations included the following: truncated follow-up of some participants; higher than expected probiotics in stool samples at baseline; fewer events than expected meant that study power may have been lower than anticipated; standard infection-related definitions were not used; and findings are not necessarily generalisable because effects may be strain specific and could vary according to patient population. Future work Future work could involve further rigorous efficacy, mechanisms and effectiveness trials of other probiotics in other population groups and settings regarding antibiotic use and susceptibility to and recovery from infections, in which potential harms should be carefully studied. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16392920. Funding This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme, a MRC and NIHR partnership. This will be published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 8, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.


2021 ◽  
pp. 039156032110498
Author(s):  
Talal Ziadeh ◽  
Roy Chebel ◽  
Chris Labaki ◽  
Gebrael Saliba ◽  
Elie El Helou

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of different modalities of bladder instillation in patients with neurogenic bladder practicing intermittent catheterization. Methods: A systematic review of the literature were conducted using two databases: Medline via PubMed and Scopus. Articles evaluating bladder instillation in patients with neurogenic bladder, who are practicing intermittent catheterization, were collected and assessed for the efficacy and safety of the studied agent by two different reviewers. Results: Among the 1896 studies, eight involving 346 patients with neurogenic bladder, were included in this systematic review according to the PRISMA protocols. Gentamicin, Hyaluronic acid, and Lactobacillus rhamnosus was found to decrease the incidence of urinary tract infections, the former reduced multidrug-resistant organisms. Kanamycin-colistin, showed a drop in the mean incidence of bacteriuria in males only. Trisdine, the only studied antiseptic, significantly reduced bacteriuria. Neomycin, however, showed no efficacy in term of bacteriuria. Regarding safety, when evaluated, no major adverse events were reported with any of the studied modalities. Conclusion: Bladder instillations of either antibiotics, antiseptics, hyaluronic acid, or Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG are efficient and safe in patients having neurogenic bladder, with recurrent urinary tract infections and practicing clean intermittent catheterization, with gentamicin being the most recommended product among the different studied agents.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 873-882 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Rianda ◽  
R. Agustina ◽  
E.A. Setiawan ◽  
N.R.M. Manikam

Available reviews have shown potential effects of probiotics on neurobehavioral outcomes through ‘gut-brain axis’ mechanism in adults. However, reviews on cognitive function in children and adolescents are lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the effect of probiotic supplementation on cognitive function in children and adolescents. A search of four databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycARTICLES, Scopus, PubMed) was conducted to identify RCTs published from January 1990 to December 2018. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria and their cognitive outcomes were analysed. Only one study found a positive result with Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) 1×1010 cfu supplementation with outcomes on attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or Asperger syndrome (AS) manifestations as diagnosed using the International Classification of Diseases-10 criteria. The supplementations were administered to Finnish mothers for 4 weeks before delivery and continuously given for 6 months after delivery if they breastfed, or to the children. ADHD or AS was diagnosed at the age of 13 years in 17.1% children in the placebo and none in the probiotic group (P=0.008). This study found significant differences in species composition and number of cells belonging to the genus Bifidobacterium between healthy children and children who later developed ADHD or AS at different time points. Six remaining studies with varying strains, durations of intervention, start-time of administration, and outcomes demonstrated no difference in cognition after probiotic supplementation. Metagenomic analyses on gut microbiota composition were not performed in any of these studies. In conclusion, the favourable effect of probiotic supplementation on cognitive function in children and adolescents was observed in one study with LGG supplementation by a risk reduction of developing ADHD or AS (i.e. autism). More long-term and follow-up trials using probiotics identifying the effect on cognition are warranted before routine use.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document