Effectiveness of probiotics in irritable bowel syndrome: Updated systematic review with meta-analysis (original) (raw)

Meta-Analysis

Copyright ©The Author(s) 2015. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.

World J Gastroenterol. Mar 14, 2015; 21(10): 3072-3084
Published online Mar 14, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i10.3072

Table 2 Characteristics of studies included in the meta-analysis

Trial Type of IBS Criteria Age (yr) Sex (Male/Female) Probiotic Probiotic dosage Duration of treatment Follow-up Outcome
Probiotic Placebo Probiotic Placebo
Kajander _et al_[33] All types Rome II 50 46 2/41 4/39 Lactobacillusrhamnosus GG 1 × 107 CFU 20 wk 3 wk ↑ Stabilization of intestinal microbiota
L. rhamnosus Lc705 ↓ Distension and abdominal pain in probiotic group
Propionibacteriumfreudenreichiissp. shermanii JS ↓ IBS symptoms
Bifidobacteriumanimalisssp. lactis Bb-12
Williams _et al_[32] All types Rome II 40 38 3/25 8/20 L. acidophilus CUL60 2.5 × 1010 CFU 8 wk 2 wk ↑ QoL
L. acidophilus CUL21 ↓ Symptom severity, bloating not improved
B. lactis CUL34,
B. bifidum CUL20
Zeng _et al_[39] D-IBS Rome II 44.6 45.8 10/4 9/6 Streptococcusthermophilus 1 × 108 CFU 4 wk - Mucosal barrier function and bowel symptoms improved
L. bulgaricus 1 × 107 CFU ↓ Small bowel permeability
L. acidophilus
B. longum
Enck _et al_[35] All types ICHPPC and WONCA 49.8 49.4 76/72 75/75 Escherichia coli (Symbioflor 2) 1.5-4.5 ×107 CFU 8 wk ND ↓ Typical symptoms of IBS patients
Drouault-Holowacz _et al_[37] All types Rome II 47 44 8/40 16/36 B. longum LA101 1 × 1010 CFU 4 wk - ↑ QoL
L. acidophilus LA102 ↓ Flatulence
Lactococcusl actis LA103 ↓ Abdominal pain and bloating
S. thermophilus LA104
Sinn _et al_[42] All types Rome III 41.9 47.5 6/14 8/12 L. acidophilus SDC 2012, 2013 2 × 109 CFU 4 wk - ↓ IBS symptoms, abdominal pain and discomfort
Enck _et al_[36] All types ICHPPC and WONCA 49.8 49.4 77/72 73/75 E. coli and Enterococcusfaecalis (Pro Symbioflor) 3-9 × 107 CFU 8 wk - ↓ 50% global symptom score and abdominal pain score
Simrén _et al_[40] All types Rome II 42 44 11/26 11/26 L. paracasei F19 5 × 107 CFU 8 wk 8 wk Improvement in both groups in pain frequency, pain and bloating severity, satisfaction with bowel habits, and interference with daily life
L. acidophilus La5
B. lactis Bb-12
Sondergaard _et al_[43] ND Rome II 53.9 48.5 7/20 6/19 L. paracasei F19 5 × 107 CFU 8 wk 8 wk Symptom relief in both groups;no difference between probiotics and placebo
L. acidophilus La5 (500 mL)
B. lactis Bb-12
Guglielmetti _et al_[44] All types Rome III 36.65 40.98 21/41 19/41 B. bifidum MIMBb75 1 × 109 CFU 4 wk 4 wk ↓ IBS symptoms like: pain, discomfort distension, bloating, digestive disorders
↑ QoL
Ducrotté _et al_[45] D-IBS (in majority of patients) Rome III 36.53 38.4 70/38 81/25 L. plantarum 299v 1 × 1010 CFU 4 wk 3 wk ↓ Abdominal pain and bloating
Kruis _et al_[34] D-IBS Rome II 46.3 45.1 12/48 16/44 E. coli (Nissle 1917) 2.5-25 × 109 CFU 12 wk - No significant effects of probiotics in general symptoms, but enteric flora altered due to gastroenterocolitis or administration of antibiotics before IBS initiation
Ki Cha _et al_[38] D-IBS Rome III 37.9 40.3 12/13 14/11 L. acidophilus 1 × 1010 CFU 8 wk 2 wk ↑ QoL
L. plantarum
L. rhamnosus
B. breve
B. lactis
B. longum
S. thermophilus
Dapoigny _et al_[46] All types Rome III 46.1 48.8 5/20 10/15 L. caseirhamnosus (LCR 35) 6 × 108 CFU 4 wk 2 wk ↓ IBS patients complaining of diarrhea
(250 mg) ↓ 50% reduction in IBS severity score in probiotic arm
Roberts _et al_[41] C-IBS, A-IBS Rome III 44.66 43.71 14/74 14/77 B. lactis CNCMI-2494 1.25 × 1010 CFU 12 wk - Significant improvement in IBS symptoms in both groups