AIM: To investigate the benefits of probiotics treatment in septic rats. METHODS: The septic rats were induced by cecal ligation and puncture. The animals of control, septic model and probiotics treated groups were treated with vehicle and mixed probiotics, respectively. The mixture of probiotics included Bifidobacterium longum, Lactobacillus bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophilus. We observed the survival of septic rats using different amounts of mixed probiotics. We also detected the bacterial population in ascites and blood of experimental sepsis using cultivation and real-time polymerase chain reaction. The severity of mucosal inflammation in colonic tissues was determined. RESULTS: Probiotics treatment improved survival of the rats significantly and this effect was dose dependent. The survival rate was 30% for vehicle-treated septic model group. However, 1 and 1/4 doses of probiotics treatment increased survival rate significantly compared with septic model group (80% and 55% vs 30%, P < 0.05). The total viable counts of bacteria in ascites decreased significantly in probiotics treated group compared with septic model group (5.20 ± 0.57 vs 9.81 ± 0.67, P < 0.05). The total positive rate of hemoculture decreased significantly in probiotics treated group compared with septic model group (33.3% vs 100.0%, P < 0.05). The population of Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus in ascites of probiotics treated group were decreased significantly compared with that of septic model group (3.93 ± 0.73 vs 8.80 ± 0.83, P < 0.05; 2.80 ± 1.04 vs 5.39 ± 1.21, P < 0.05). With probiotics treatment, there was a decrease in the scores of inflammatory cell infiltration into the intestinal mucosa in septic animals (1.50 ± 0.25 vs 2.88 ± 0.14, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus may be primary pathogens in septic rats. Probiotics improve survival of septic rats by suppressing these conditioned pathogens.
AIM: To investigate the benefits of probiotics treatment in septic rats. METHODS: The septic rats were induced by cecal ligation and puncture. The animals of control, septic model and probiotics treated groups were treated with vehicle and mixed probiotics, respectively. The mixture of probiotics included Bifidobacterium longum, Lactobacillus bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophilus. We observed the survival of septic rats using different amounts of mixed probiotics. We also detected the bacterial population in ascites and blood of experimental sepsis using cultivation and real-time polymerase chain reaction. The severity of mucosal inflammation in colonic tissues was determined. RESULTS: Probiotics treatment improved survival of the rats significantly and this effect was dose dependent. The survival rate was 30% for vehicle-treated septic model group. However, 1 and 1/4 doses of probiotics treatment increased survival rate significantly compared with septic model group (80% and 55% vs 30%, P < 0.05). The total viable counts of bacteria in ascites decreased significantly in probiotics treated group compared with septic model group (5.20 ± 0.57 vs 9.81 ± 0.67, P < 0.05). The total positive rate of hemoculture decreased significantly in probiotics treated group compared with septic model group (33.3% vs 100.0%, P < 0.05). The population of Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus in ascites of probiotics treated group were decreased significantly compared with that of septic model group (3.93 ± 0.73 vs 8.80 ± 0.83, P < 0.05; 2.80 ± 1.04 vs 5.39 ± 1.21, P < 0.05). With probiotics treatment, there was a decrease in the scores of inflammatory cell infiltration into the intestinal mucosa in septic animals (1.50 ± 0.25 vs 2.88 ± 0.14, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION:Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus may be primary pathogens in septic rats. Probiotics improve survival of septic rats by suppressing these conditioned pathogens.
Authors: Huan Yang; Mahendar Ochani; Jianhua Li; Xiaoling Qiang; Mahira Tanovic; Helena E Harris; Srinivas M Susarla; Luis Ulloa; Hong Wang; Robert DiRaimo; Christopher J Czura; Haichao Wang; Jesse Roth; H Shaw Warren; Mitchell P Fink; Matthew J Fenton; Ulf Andersson; Kevin J Tracey Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2003-12-26 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: U Andersson; H Wang; K Palmblad; A C Aveberger; O Bloom; H Erlandsson-Harris; A Janson; R Kokkola; M Zhang; H Yang; K J Tracey Journal: J Exp Med Date: 2000-08-21 Impact factor: 14.307
Authors: Szabolcs Péter Tallósy; Marietta Zita Poles; Attila Rutai; Roland Fejes; László Juhász; Katalin Burián; József Sóki; Andrea Szabó; Mihály Boros; József Kaszaki Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-11-23 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: A I Gutiérrez-Falcón; A M Ramos-Nuez; A Espinosa de Los Monteros Y Zayas; D F Padilla Castillo; M Isabel García-Laorden; F J Chamizo-López; F Real Valcárcel; F Artilles Campelo; A Bordes Benítez; P Nogueira Salgueiro; C Domínguez Cabrera; J C Rivero-Vera; J M González-Martín; J Martín Caballero; R Frías-Beneyto; Jesús Villar; J L Martín-Barrasa Journal: Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins Date: 2021-03-13 Impact factor: 4.609