Nicole T Shen1, Anna Maw2, Lyubov L Tmanova3, Alejandro Pino4, Kayley Ancy4, Carl V Crawford5, Matthew S Simon6, Arthur T Evans7. 1. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Weill Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York. Electronic address: nts9004@nyp.org. 2. Hospitalist Medicine Section, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado. 3. Samuel J. Wood Library and CV Starr Biomedical Information Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. 4. NewYork-Presbyterian-Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, New York. 5. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Weill Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York. 6. Section of Hospital Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Weill Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York; Division of Infectious Diseases, Weill Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York. 7. Section of Hospital Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Weill Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Systematic reviews have provided evidence for the efficacy of probiotics in preventing Clostridium difficile infection (CDI), but guidelines do not recommend probiotic use for prevention of CDI. We performed an updated systematic review to help guide clinical practice. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, International Journal of Probiotics and Prebiotics, and The Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials evaluating use of probiotics and CDI in hospitalized adults taking antibiotics. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias and overall quality of the evidence. Primary and secondary outcomes were incidence of CDI and adverse events, respectively. Secondary analyses examined the effects of probiotic species, dose, timing, formulation, duration, and study quality. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 19 published studies, comprising 6261 subjects. The incidence of CDI in the probiotic cohort, 1.6% (54 of 3277), was lower than of controls, 3.9% (115 of 2984) (P < .001). The pooled relative risk of CDI in probiotic users was 0.42 (95% confidence interval, 0.30-0.57; I2 = 0.0%). Meta-regression analysis demonstrated that probiotics were significantly more effective if given closer to the first antibiotic dose, with a decrement in efficacy for every day of delay in starting probiotics (P = .04); probiotics given within 2 days of antibiotic initiation produced a greater reduction of risk for CDI (relative risk, 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.48; I2 = 0%) than later administration (relative risk, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.23; I2 = 0%) (P = .02). There was no increased risk for adverse events among patients given probiotics. The overall quality of the evidence was high. CONCLUSIONS: In a systematic review with meta-regression analysis, we found evidence that administration of probiotics closer to the first dose of antibiotic reduces the risk of CDI by >50% in hospitalized adults. Future research should focus on optimal probiotic dose, species, and formulation. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42015016395.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Systematic reviews have provided evidence for the efficacy of probiotics in preventing Clostridium difficile infection (CDI), but guidelines do not recommend probiotic use for prevention of CDI. We performed an updated systematic review to help guide clinical practice. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, International Journal of Probiotics and Prebiotics, and The Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials evaluating use of probiotics and CDI in hospitalized adults taking antibiotics. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias and overall quality of the evidence. Primary and secondary outcomes were incidence of CDI and adverse events, respectively. Secondary analyses examined the effects of probiotic species, dose, timing, formulation, duration, and study quality. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 19 published studies, comprising 6261 subjects. The incidence of CDI in the probiotic cohort, 1.6% (54 of 3277), was lower than of controls, 3.9% (115 of 2984) (P < .001). The pooled relative risk of CDI in probiotic users was 0.42 (95% confidence interval, 0.30-0.57; I2 = 0.0%). Meta-regression analysis demonstrated that probiotics were significantly more effective if given closer to the first antibiotic dose, with a decrement in efficacy for every day of delay in starting probiotics (P = .04); probiotics given within 2 days of antibiotic initiation produced a greater reduction of risk for CDI (relative risk, 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.48; I2 = 0%) than later administration (relative risk, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.23; I2 = 0%) (P = .02). There was no increased risk for adverse events among patients given probiotics. The overall quality of the evidence was high. CONCLUSIONS: In a systematic review with meta-regression analysis, we found evidence that administration of probiotics closer to the first dose of antibiotic reduces the risk of CDI by >50% in hospitalized adults. Future research should focus on optimal probiotic dose, species, and formulation. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42015016395.
Authors: Anna M Seekatz; Emily Wolfrum; Christopher M DeWald; Rosemary K B Putler; Kimberly C Vendrov; Krishna Rao; Vincent B Young Journal: Anaerobe Date: 2018-05-31 Impact factor: 3.331