Copyright
©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Mar 14, 2013; 19(10): 1527-1540
Published online Mar 14, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i10.1527
Published online Mar 14, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i10.1527
Ref. | Patients (n) | Duration of therapy | Probiotic strains | Dose (CFU/d) | Outcomes |
Maupas et al[88] | 34 | 1 mo | Saccharomyces boulardii | 9 × 109 | Improved stool number and consistency |
Gade et al[89] | 54 | 1 mo | Paraghurt (Streptococcus faecium) | 1 × 10¹² | Improved symptoms |
Halpern et al[90] | 18 | 4 mo | Lactobacillus acidophilus | 2 × 1010 | Improved symptoms |
O’Sullivan et al[91] | 25 | 1 mo | Lactobacillus GG | 1 × 1010 | No benefit |
Nobaek et al[92] | 60 | 1 mo | Lactobacillus plantarum 299V Pro-Viva® | 5 × 107 | Improved global symptoms |
Niedzielin et al[93] | 40 | 1 mo | Lactobacillus plantarum 299V Pro-Viva® | 2 × 1010 | Improved global symptoms |
Kim et al[94] | 25 | 2 d-IBS | VSL3® | 9 × 10¹¹ | Reduced bloating |
Tsuchiya et al[95] | 68 | 3 mo | Lactobacillus acidophilus | 1.5 × 106 | Improved symptoms |
Lactobacillus helveticus | 1.3 × 109 | ||||
Bifidobacterium | 4.95 × 109 | ||||
O’Mahony et al[96] | 80 | 2 mo | Bifidobacterium longum subspecies infantis vs Lactobacillus salivarius | 1 × 1010 | B. infantis: improved global symptoms and anti-inflammatory cytokine profileLactobacillus salivarius: no benefit |
Kajander et al[97] | 103 | 6 mo | Mixture (2 strains of Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Bifidobacterium breve, Propionibacterium freudenreichii) | 8-9 × 109 | Improved global symptoms |
Bittner et al[98] | 25 | 0.5 mo | 29 bacteria + prebiotic Prescript-Assist® | 2.6 × 108 | Improved wellbeing |
Sen et al[99] | 12 | 1 mo | Lactobacillus plantarum 299V Pro-Viva® | 5 × 107 | No benefit; Study design flawed |
Bausserman et al[100] | 50 | 1.5 mo | Lactobacillus GG | 2 × 1010 | No benefit |
Niv et al[101] | 39 | 6 mo | Lactobacillus GG | 2 × 108 | No benefit Francis severity IBS score |
Kim et al[102] | 48 | 1 or 2 mo | VSL3® | 8 × 109 | Reduced flatulence, retarded colonic transit |
Whorwell et al[103] | 362 | 1 mo | Bifidobacterium longum subspecies infantis 35 624 in 3 doses | 1 × 106 | Improved global symptoms |
1 × 108 | |||||
1 × 1010 | |||||
Long et al[104] | 60 | 0.5 mo | Bifidobacterium | 2 × 108 | Symptoms resolved |
Gawrońska et al[105] | 104 | 1 mo | Lactobacillus GG | 6 × 109 | Reduced frequency of pain |
Moon et al[106] | 34 | 1 mo | Bifidobacterium subtilis, Streptococcus faecium | 750 mL/d, CFU/d not given | Reduced frequency pain |
Marteau et al[107] | 116 | 1 mo | Lactibiane® (4 strains of Bifidobacterium longum, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus lactis, Streptococcus thermophilus) | 1 × 1010 | Reduced painIncreased colonic transit in those with constipation |
Simrén et al[108] | 76 | 1.5 mo | Lactobacillus plantarum 299V | 2 × 109 | No benefit |
Simrén et al[109] | 118 | 2 mo | Lactobacillus paracasei ssp paracasei | 2 × 1010 | No benefit |
Guyonnet et al[110] | 274 | 1.5 mo | Bifidobacterium animalis, Streptococcus thermophilus and Lactobacillus bulgaricus | 1.25 × 1010 1.2 × 109 | Improved bloating and constipation |
Drouault-Holowacz et al[111] | 116 | 1 mo | Bifidobacterium longum, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus lactis, Streptococcus thermophilus | 1 × 1010 | Not significant in relieving symptoms |
Sinn et al[112] | 40 | 1 mo | Lactobacillus acidophilus | 2 × 108 | Improved abdominal pain and discomfort |
Enck et al[113] | 297 | 1 mo | Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis | 4.5 × 102 | Improvement in pain |
Hun et al[114] | 44 | 2 mo | Bacillus coagulans | 8 × 108 | Improvement abdominal pain and bloating |
Dolin et al[115] | 61 | 2 mo | Bacillus coagulans | 2 × 109 | Diminution of diarrhea |
Ligaarden et al[116] | 16 | 1 mo | Lactobacillus plantarum | 1010/L | Worsening of symptoms |
Moayyedi et al[117] | 19 randomised controlled trials in 1650 patients | Probiotics appear to be efficacious but the magnitude of benefit and the most effective strains are uncertain |
- Citation: Caselli M, Cassol F, Calò G, Holton J, Zuliani G, Gasbarrini A. Actual concept of "probiotics": Is it more functional to science or business? World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19(10): 1527-1540
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v19/i10/1527.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v19.i10.1527