4.7 Review

Systematic review with meta-analysis: Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in children and adults

Journal

ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
Volume 42, Issue 10, Pages 1149-1157

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apt.13404

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Medical University of Warsaw

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundThe effects of probiotics are strain specific. The clinical effects of each strain need to be evaluated separately. AimTo evaluate the efficacy of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD) in children and adults. MethodsThe Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases were searched up to July 2015, with no language restrictions, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Reference lists of reviews and included studies were examined. The quality of evidence (QoE) was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines. ResultsTwelve RCTs (1499 participants) were included. Treatment with LGG compared with placebo or no additional treatment reduced the risk of AAD in patients treated with antibiotics from 22.4% to 12.3% (11 RCTs, n=1308, relative risk, RR: 0.49, 95% confidence interval, CI: 0.29-0.83, low QoE). However, when children and adults were evaluated separately, the difference was significant in children only (five RCTs, n=445, RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.26-0.89; moderate QoE). In adults, the difference was not significant (six RCTs, n=863, RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.20-1.15; low QoE), except for in a subset of patients receiving antibiotics as part of Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy (four RCTs, n=280, RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11-0.59; low QoE). ConclusionsThis meta-analysis shows that Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG is effective in preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in children and adults treated with antibiotics for any reason. However, the quality of evidence is moderate to low.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available