4.5 Review

Systematic review and meta-analysis: Multi-strain probiotics as adjunct therapy for Helicobacter pylori eradication and prevention of adverse events

期刊

UNITED EUROPEAN GASTROENTEROLOGY JOURNAL
卷 4, 期 4, 页码 546-561

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/2050640615617358

关键词

Probiotics; Helicobacter pylori; meta-analysis; adverse events; diarrhea

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Eradication rates with triple therapy for Helicobacter pylori infections have currently declined to unacceptable levels worldwide. Newer quadruple therapies are burdened with a high rate of adverse events. Whether multi-strain probiotics can improve eradication rates or diminish adverse events remains uncertain. Methods Relevant publications in which patients with H. pylori infections were randomized to a multi-strain probiotic or control were identified in PubMed, Cochrane Databases, and other sources from 1 January 1960-3 June 2015. Primary outcomes included eradication rates, incidence of any adverse event and the incidence of antibiotic-associated diarrhea. As probiotic efficacy is strain-specific, pooled relative risks and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using meta-analysis stratified by similar multi-strain probiotic mixtures. Results A total of 19 randomized controlled trials (20 treatment arms, n=2730) assessing one of six mixtures of strains of probiotics were included. Four multi-strain probiotics significantly improved H. pylori eradication rates, five significantly prevented any adverse reactions and three significantly reduced antibiotic-associated diarrhea. Only two probiotic mixtures (Lactobacillus acidophilus/Bifidobacterium animalis and an eight-strain mixture) had significant efficacy for all three outcomes. Conclusions Our meta-analysis found adjunctive use of some multi-strain probiotics may improve H. pylori eradication rates and prevent the development of adverse events and antibiotic-associated diarrhea, but not all mixtures were effective.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据