Y Derwa1,2, D J Gracie1,2, P J Hamlin1, A C Ford1,2. 1. Leeds Gastroenterology Institute, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK. 2. Leeds Institute of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) are inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Evidence implicates disturbances of the gastrointestinal microbiota in their pathogenesis. AIM: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the efficacy of probiotics in IBD. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched (until November 2016). Eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruited adults with UC or CD, and compared probiotics with 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASAs) or placebo. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain a relative risk (RR) of failure to achieve remission in active IBD, or RR of relapse of disease activity in quiescent IBD, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The search identified 12 253 citations. Twenty-two RCTs were eligible. There was no benefit of probiotics over placebo in inducing remission in active UC (RR of failure to achieve remission=0.86; 95% CI=0.68-1.08). However, when only trials of VSL#3 were considered there appeared to be a benefit (RR=0.74; 95% CI=0.63-0.87). Probiotics appeared equivalent to 5-ASAs in preventing UC relapse (RR=1.02; 95% CI=0.85-1.23). There was no benefit of probiotics in inducing remission of active CD, in preventing relapse of quiescent CD, or in preventing relapse of CD after surgically induced remission. CONCLUSIONS: VSL#3 may be effective in inducing remission in active UC. Probiotics may be as effective as 5-ASAs in preventing relapse of quiescent UC. The efficacy of probiotics in CD remains uncertain, and more evidence from RCTs is required before their utility is known.
BACKGROUND:Ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) are inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Evidence implicates disturbances of the gastrointestinal microbiota in their pathogenesis. AIM: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the efficacy of probiotics in IBD. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched (until November 2016). Eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruited adults with UC or CD, and compared probiotics with 5-aminosalicylates (5-ASAs) or placebo. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain a relative risk (RR) of failure to achieve remission in active IBD, or RR of relapse of disease activity in quiescent IBD, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The search identified 12 253 citations. Twenty-two RCTs were eligible. There was no benefit of probiotics over placebo in inducing remission in active UC (RR of failure to achieve remission=0.86; 95% CI=0.68-1.08). However, when only trials of VSL#3 were considered there appeared to be a benefit (RR=0.74; 95% CI=0.63-0.87). Probiotics appeared equivalent to 5-ASAs in preventing UC relapse (RR=1.02; 95% CI=0.85-1.23). There was no benefit of probiotics in inducing remission of active CD, in preventing relapse of quiescent CD, or in preventing relapse of CD after surgically induced remission. CONCLUSIONS: VSL#3 may be effective in inducing remission in active UC. Probiotics may be as effective as 5-ASAs in preventing relapse of quiescent UC. The efficacy of probiotics in CD remains uncertain, and more evidence from RCTs is required before their utility is known.
Authors: Maria Pina Dore; Chiara Rocchi; Nunzio Pio Longo; Antonio Mario Scanu; Gianpaolo Vidili; Federica Padedda; Giovanni Mario Pes Journal: Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins Date: 2020-03 Impact factor: 4.609