PMID 22570464 Probiotics for the prevention and treatment of antibiotic-associated diarrhea: a systematic review and meta-analysis 메타분석 · JAMA, 2012 63개 RCT·11,811명 - 프로바이오틱스가 항생제 연관 설사를 42% 낮춤(RR 0.58), 단 균주 기록 부실.
핵심요약
12개 데이터베이스를 검색해 82개 RCT를 포함한 체계적 문헌고찰·메타분석여러 개별 연구의 결과를 통계적으로 합쳐 하나의 종합 결론을 내는 분석.. 이 중 결과 보고가 된 63개 RCT·11,811명을 종합하면 프로바이오틱스는 항생제 연관 설사(AAD) 위험을 유의하게 낮췄다(상대위험 0.58, 95% CI 0.50~0.68, 13명당 1명 예방). 대부분 락토바실루스 기반이었으나 균주 기록이 부실했고 이질성이 커, 어떤 균주가 어떤 환자·항생제에 가장 효과적인지는 결론짓지 못했다.
원문 초록 보기
CONTEXT: Probiotics are live microorganisms intended to confer a health benefit when consumed. One condition for which probiotics have been advocated is the diarrhea that is a common adverse effect of antibiotic use. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the evidence for probiotic use in the prevention and treatment of antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD). RESULTS: A total of 82 RCTs met inclusion criteria. The majority used Lactobacillus-based interventions alone or in combination with other genera; strains were poorly documented. The pooled relative risk in a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis of 63 RCTs, which included 11 811 participants, indicated a statistically significant association of probiotic administration with reduction in AAD (relative risk, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.68; P < .001; I(2), 54%; [risk difference, -0.07; 95% CI, -0.10 to -0.05], [number needed to treat, 13; 95% CI, 10.3 to 19.1]) in trials reporting on the number of patients with AAD. However, there exists significant heterogeneity in pooled results and the evidence is insufficient to determine whether this association varies systematically by population, antibiotic characteristic, or probiotic preparation. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled evidence suggests that probiotics are associated with a reduction in AAD. More research is needed to determine which probiotics are associated with the greatest efficacy and for which patients receiving which specific antibiotics. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.
원문 보기 ↗ PMID 29257353 Probiotics for the prevention of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in adults and children 메타분석(코크란) · Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2017 31개 RCT·8,672명 - 프로바이오틱스가 C. difficile 설사를 60% 낮춤(RR 0.40), 이득은 고위험군에 집중.
핵심요약
39개 연구를 검토한 코크란치료·예방의 근거를 엄격히 검토·종합하는 국제 연구 네트워크(Cochrane). 리뷰. C. difficile 연관 설사(CDAD)를 다룬 31개 RCT·8,672명을 종합하면 프로바이오틱스는 발생 위험을 60% 낮췄다(1.5% 대 4.0%, 상대위험 0.40, GRADE근거의 확실성을 높음~매우낮음으로 평가하는 국제 표준 등급 체계. 중간). 다만 사후 하위분석에서 이득은 발병 기저 위험이 5%를 넘는 환자에 집중됐고(70% 감소), 위험 5% 이하 환자에서는 차이가 없었다. 저자들은 면역저하나 중증 쇠약이 없는 환자에서 항생제와 함께 단기 사용하는 것은 대체로 안전·효과적이라고 보았다.
원문 초록 보기
BACKGROUND: Antibiotics can disturb gastrointestinal microbiota which may lead to reduced resistance to pathogens such as Clostridium difficile (C. difficile). Probiotics are live microbial preparations that, when administered in adequate amounts, may confer a health benefit to the host, and are a potential C. difficile prevention strategy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of probiotics for preventing C.difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) in adults and children. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies (9955 participants) met the eligibility requirements for our review. A complete case analysis among trials investigating CDAD (31 trials, 8672 participants) suggests that probiotics reduce the risk of CDAD by 60%. The incidence of CDAD was 1.5% (70/4525) in the probiotic group compared to 4.0% (164/4147) in the placebo or no treatment control group (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.52; GRADE = moderate). However, in a post hoc analysis, we did observe a subgroup effect with respect to baseline risk of developing CDAD. Trials with a baseline CDAD risk of 0% to 2% and 3% to 5% did not show any difference in risk but trials enrolling participants with a baseline risk of > 5% for developing CDAD demonstrated a large 70% risk reduction (interaction P value = 0.01). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on this systematic review and meta-analysis of 31 randomized controlled trials including 8672 patients, moderate certainty evidence suggests that probiotics are effective for preventing CDAD (NNTB = 42 patients, 95% CI 32 to 58). Our post hoc subgroup analyses to explore heterogeneity indicated that probiotics are effective among trials with a CDAD baseline risk >5% (NNTB = 12; moderate certainty evidence), but not among trials with a baseline risk ≤5% (low to moderate certainty evidence). The short-term use of probiotics appears to be safe and effective when used along with antibiotics in patients who are not immunocompromised or severely debilitated. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.
원문 보기 ↗ PMID 30462938 Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG versus Placebo for Acute Gastroenteritis in Children RCT · N Engl J Med, 2018 소아 971명 - 락토바실루스 GG가 급성 위장염 증상·설사·구토를 위약유효 성분이 없는 가짜 약(플라시보). 효과 비교의 기준으로 쓴다. 대비 전혀 줄이지 못함(RR 0.96).
핵심요약
미국 10개 소아 응급실에서 급성 위장염 소아 971명을 대상으로 한 대형 무작위 이중맹검 시험. 락토바실루스 GG(하루 2회 1×10^10 CFU, 5일)는 위약유효 성분이 없는 가짜 약(플라시보). 효과 비교의 기준으로 쓴다. 대비 14일 내 중등도~중증 위장염(상대위험 0.96, 95% CI 0.68~1.35)을 줄이지 못했고, 설사 지속시간(중앙값 49.7시간 대 50.9시간)·구토·어린이집 결석에도 차이가 없었다. 소아 급성 위장염에 프로바이오틱스가 도움이 되지 않는다는 결과.
원문 초록 보기
BACKGROUND: Acute gastroenteritis develops in millions of children in the United States every year, and treatment with probiotics is common. However, data to support the use of probiotics in this population are limited. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial involving children 3 months to 4 years of age with acute gastroenteritis who presented to one of 10 U.S. pediatric emergency departments. Participants received a 5-day course of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG at a dose of 1×1010 colony-forming units twice daily or matching placebo. The primary outcome was moderate-to-severe gastroenteritis, which was defined as an illness episode with a total score on the modified Vesikari scale of 9 or higher, within 14 days after enrollment. RESULTS: Among the 971 participants, 943 (97.1%) completed the trial. The modified Vesikari scale score for the 14-day period after enrollment was 9 or higher in 55 of 468 participants (11.8%) in the L. rhamnosus GG group and in 60 of 475 participants (12.6%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.68 to 1.35; P=0.83). There were no significant differences between the L. rhamnosus GG group and the placebo group in the duration of diarrhea (median, 49.7 hours in the L. rhamnosus GG group and 50.9 hours in the placebo group; P=0.26), duration of vomiting, or day-care absenteeism. CONCLUSIONS: Among preschool children with acute gastroenteritis, those who received a 5-day course of L. rhamnosus GG did not have better outcomes than those who received placebo. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.
원문 보기 ↗ PMID 30462939 Multicenter Trial of a Combination Probiotic for Children with Gastroenteritis RCT · N Engl J Med, 2018 소아 886명(PROGUT) - 복합 균주(L. rhamnosus·L. helveticus)가 위장염 결과를 위약유효 성분이 없는 가짜 약(플라시보). 효과 비교의 기준으로 쓴다. 대비 개선하지 못함(OR 1.06).
핵심요약
캐나다 6개 소아 응급실에서 위장염 소아 886명을 대상으로 한 무작위 이중맹검 시험(PROGUT). 복합 균주 제품(L. rhamnosus R0011 + L. helveticus R0052, 하루 2회 4×10^9 CFU, 5일)은 위약유효 성분이 없는 가짜 약(플라시보). 효과 비교의 기준으로 쓴다. 대비 14일 내 중등도~중증 위장염(오즈비 1.06, 95% CI 0.77~1.46)을 예방하지 못했고, 설사·구토 지속시간에도 차이가 없었다. 앞의 미국 시험과 같은 방향의 무효 결과다.
원문 초록 보기
BACKGROUND: Gastroenteritis accounts for approximately 1.7 million visits to the emergency department (ED) by children in the United States every year. Data to determine whether the use of probiotics improves outcomes in these children are lacking. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial involving 886 children 3 to 48 months of age with gastroenteritis who presented to six pediatric EDs in Canada. Participants received a 5-day course of a combination probiotic product containing Lactobacillus rhamnosus R0011 and L. helveticus R0052, at a dose of 4.0×109 colony-forming units twice daily or placebo. The primary outcome was moderate-to-severe gastroenteritis, which was defined according to a post-enrollment modified Vesikari scale symptom score of 9 or higher. RESULTS: Moderate-to-severe gastroenteritis within 14 days after enrollment occurred in 108 of 414 participants (26.1%) who were assigned to probiotics and 102 of 413 participants (24.7%) who were assigned to placebo (odds ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.46; P=0.72). There were no significant differences between the probiotic group and the placebo group in the median duration of diarrhea or vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: In children who presented to the emergency department with gastroenteritis, twice-daily administration of a combined L. rhamnosus-L. helveticus probiotic did not prevent the development of moderate-to-severe gastroenteritis within 14 days after enrollment. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.
원문 보기 ↗ PMID 25927096 Probiotics for preventing acute upper respiratory tract infections 메타분석(코크란) · Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2015 12개 RCT·3,720명 - 프로바이오틱스가 감기 발생·기간·항생제 처방을 줄임, 단 근거 질 낮음~매우 낮음.
핵심요약
12개 RCT·3,720명(어린이·성인·노인)을 메타분석여러 개별 연구의 결과를 통계적으로 합쳐 하나의 종합 결론을 내는 분석.한 코크란치료·예방의 근거를 엄격히 검토·종합하는 국제 연구 네트워크(Cochrane). 리뷰. 프로바이오틱스는 위약유효 성분이 없는 가짜 약(플라시보). 효과 비교의 기준으로 쓴다.보다 급성 상기도감염(감기)을 한 번 이상 겪는 사람 수를 줄였고(오즈비 0.53), 한 번의 증상 기간을 약 1.9일 단축했으며 항생제 처방률도 낮췄다. 다만 대부분의 결과에서 근거의 질이 낮음 또는 매우 낮음으로 평가돼, 유익할 가능성은 있으나 확실하지 않다.
원문 초록 보기
BACKGROUND: Probiotics may improve a person's health by regulating their immune function. Some trials have shown that probiotic strains can prevent respiratory infections. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of probiotics (any specified strain or dose), compared with placebo, in the prevention of acute URTIs in people of all ages, at risk of acute URTIs. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 RCTs, although we could only extract data to meta-analyse 12 trials, which involved 3720 participants including children, adults (aged around 40 years) and older people. We found that probiotics were better than placebo when measuring the number of participants experiencing episodes of acute URTI (at least one episode: odds ratio (OR) 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 0.76, P value < 0.001, low quality evidence); the mean duration of an episode of acute URTI (mean difference (MD) -1.89; 95% CI -2.03 to -1.75, P value < 0.001, low quality evidence); reduced antibiotic prescription rates for acute URTIs (OR 0.65; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.94, moderate quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Probiotics were better than placebo in reducing the number of participants experiencing episodes of acute URTI, the mean duration of an episode of acute URTI, antibiotic use and cold-related school absence. This indicates that probiotics may be more beneficial than placebo for preventing acute URTIs. However, the quality of the evidence was low or very low. ※ 파이프라인이 API로 수집·저장한 초록 원문 그대로. 한국어 핵심요약은 이 텍스트만을 근거로 작성됩니다.
원문 보기 ↗