| Literature DB >> 30487675 |
Bing Li1, Junqing Zheng1, Xia Zhang2, Shan Hong3.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of oral administration of probiotic Lactobacillus casei Shirota and amoxicillin-sulbactam in treating childhood fast breathing pneumonia. 518 children diagnosed of fast breathing pneumonia were enrolled and randomly assigned to be administered either amoxicillin-sulbactam + Lactobacillus casei Shirota or amoxicillin-sulbactam + placebo. Primary outcome was defined as treatment failure before day 3, and secondary outcome was defined as treatment failure during follow-ups on day 6 and 12. Serum levels of tumor necrosis factor-α and interferon-γ were also examined at the end of day 3. Treatment failure rate before day 3 was significantly reduced in amoxicillin-sulbactam + Lactobacillus casei Shirota group compared to amoxicillin-sulbactam + placebo group. Serum levels of tumor necrosis factor-α and interferon-γ were both significantly reduced in amoxicillin-sulbactam + placebo group on day 3. On day 6 and 12, although treatment failure rates were higher than on day 3 in both groups, it was still significantly reduced in amoxicillin-sulbactam + Lactobacillus casei Shirota group. No severe adverse effects were observed in either treatment group. In conclusion, Probiotic Lactobacillus casei Shirota, in combination with amoxicillin-sulbactam, is more effective in treating childhood fast breathing pneumonia, which supports the potential clinical application of Lactobacillus casei Shirota as a safe supplement to amoxicillin-sulbactam therapy against childhood fast breathing pneumonia.Entities:
Keywords: Lactobacillus casei Shirota; amoxicillin-sulbactam; childhood pneumonia; fast breathing pneumonia; probiotics
Year: 2018 PMID: 30487675 PMCID: PMC6252301 DOI: 10.3164/jcbn.17-117
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Biochem Nutr ISSN: 0912-0009 Impact factor: 3.114
Fig. 1Study design.
Comparison of baseline characteristics between analyzed patients of the two treatment groups
| AS + LcS ( | AS + placebo ( | |
|---|---|---|
| Gender (male/female) | 104/111 | 107/106 |
| Median age, range (months) | 27.3 (2–48) | 26.8 (2–48) |
| Symptoms at enrollment | ||
| Fever | 67 | 71 |
| Tachypnea | 128 | 133 |
| Chest retraction | 12 | 10 |
| Reduced pulmonary expansion | 47 | 51 |
| Rhonchi | 154 | 149 |
| Wheezing | 86 | 91 |
| Crackles | 124 | 112 |
Primary outcome: comparison of treatment failure up to day 3 between analyzed patients of the two treatment groups
| AS + LcS ( | AS + placebo ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Fever | 10 | 22 | <0.05 |
| Tachypnea | 19 | 54 | <0.05 |
| Chest indrawing | 4 | 9 | <0.05 |
| Adverse drug reaction | 0 | 0 | N.A. |
| Total number reached primary outcome | 182 | 128 | <0.05 |
N.A. not applicable.
Fig. 2Serum levels of TNF-α and IFN-γ were analyzed patients of the two treatment groups. Values are mean ± SD, *p<0.05 compared with AS + placebo group, respectively.
Secondary outcome: comparison of treatment failure at day 6 and 12 between analyzed patients of the two treatment groups
| Day 6 | Day 12 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AS + LcS ( | AS + placebo ( | AS + LcS ( | AS + placebo ( | ||||
| Persistent cough | 11 | 26 | <0.05 | 19 | 41 | <0.05 | |
| Recurrent fever | 9 | 19 | <0.05 | 18 | 39 | <0.05 | |
| Total number reached secondary outcome | 162 | 83 | <0.05 | 145 | 48 | <0.05 | |