4.7 Article

Effects of probiotic therapy in critically ill patients: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NUTRITION
卷 85, 期 3, 页码 816-823

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ajcn/85.3.816

关键词

intestine; multiple organ dysfunction syndrome; Lactobacillus sp.; Bifidobacterium; sepsis

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [49434-2] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) is a major cause of mortality in intensive care units. A breakdown in gut barrier function and immune dysfunction are associated with the onset of MODS. Probiotic bacteria have been shown to modulate intestinal barrier and immune function. Objective: This study assessed the efficacy of a probiotic compound in a viable and nonviable formulation in modulating intestinal permeability and immune function and preventing the onset of MODS in patients in the intensive care unit. Design: A double-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted in the intensive care unit of a tertiary care teaching hospital. Twenty-eight critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 3 treatments daily for 7 d: 1) placebo, 2) viable probiotics, or 3) equivalent probiotic sonicates. MODS scores and systemic concentrations of immunoglobulin (Ig) A and IgG were measured on days - 1, 4, and 7, and intestinal permeability measurements were taken daily. Results: The patients responded to viable probiotics with a significantly larger increase in systemic IgA and IgG concentrations than in the patients who received placebo or sonicates (P < 0.05). MODS scores were not significantly affected by probiotic treatment. Over the study period, intestinal permeability decreased in most patients. Conclusion: Patients receiving viable probiotics show a greater enhancement in immune activity than do patients receiving either placebo or probiotic bacterial sonicates.

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

4.7
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