ObjectiveTo compare the outcomes associated with the use of probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics for the treatment of chronic constipation in adults.MethodsWe searched eight electronic databases from database inception to July 11, 2023, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that report efficacy and safety for the treatment of chronic constipation. The risk of bias in the included RCTs was evaluated according to the Cochrane tool, and the certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis framework. The analysis was conducted using R version 4.3.0.ResultsOut of the 37 RCTs, a total of 21 different types of interventions were reported, involving 3,903 patients. This NMA demonstrated that both prebiotics and synbiotics resulted in an increase in frequency of stool movements per week. Compared to placebo, lactulose (Mean difference [MD] = 3.39, 95% Confdence interval [CI] [1.13, 5.65], moderate certainty), mix2 (consisting of Lactulose and Bacillus coagulans) (MD = 3.63, 95% CI [1.37, 5.89], moderate certainty), mix6 (consisting of Lactulose and Bifidobacterium coagulans) (MD = 4.30, 95% CI [1.04, 7.54], low certainty), and mix7 (consisting of Lactulose, Bifidobacterium subtilis, and Enterococcus faecium) (MD = 4.58, 95% CI [1.35, 7.78], moderate certainty) exhibited a significant effect. Notably, mix7 demonstrated the highest probability of being the most effective intervention (94.8%). Furthermore, when compared to L. plantarum, four probiotics and two synbiotics showed significant advantages in the Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptoms (PAC-SYM) score. L. reuteri (MD = -13.74, 95% CI [-22.20, -4.66], very low certainty) exhibited a significant effect in improving the Patient Assessment of Constipation Quality of Life (PAC-QoL) score. In terms of safety, there were no statistically significant differences between the intervention and control groups in all adverse event analyses.ConclusionsModerate to very low evidence supports the use of lactulose and synbiotics to increase the number of weekly stool movements in patients, particularly highlighting the significant impact of synbiotics in increasing the number of weekly stool movements in patients with constipation. The use of L. paracasei showed improvements in PAC-SYM scores, while L. reuteri demonstrated enhancements in PAC-QoL scores.

Gut microbiota has been identified as a unique endocrine organ linked to the development of cardiovascular disease and other illnesses, especially deteriorated in overweight and obese postmenopausal women. The object of this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the effects of oral supplementation with probiotics for overweight and obese postmenopausal women. We performed a systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to April 2022 in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also performed a hand search by reviewing reference lists to identify trials. The risk of bias in individual studies was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB). Two reviewers independently selected studies and collected data. There were 6 studies from 5 RCTs with 281 participants in this systematic review. Compared with the placebo, the probiotics supplementation group had reductions in insulin (MD - 4.20 IU/L (95% CI - 8.11 to - 0.30 IU/L), I-2 = 54%), HOMA-IR (MD - 1.25 (95% CI - 2.49 to - 0.01), I-2 = 50%), and TNF-alpha (MD - 0.12 pg/mL (95% CI - 0.22 to - 0.01 pg/mL), I-2 = 44%). Improvements were also shown in body adiposity and lipid profile, but these effects were nonsignificant. In addition to body adiposity and cardiovascular risk markers, one trial showed the administration of probiotics also had an effect on iron metabolism. In conclusion, probiotics have a potential benefit on glucose metabolism and inflammatory process in overweight and obese postmenopausal women, but this effect is mild. It demonstrates that oral probiotics supplementation can be a complementary treatment for improving the fitness of postmenopausal women with overweight and obesity.

Purpose Accumulating evidence showed that probiotics therapy might be effective in treating diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D). This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of probiotics therapy for the treatment of IBS-D. Methods We performed a comprehensive literature search in eight electronic databases, and gray literature from inception to August 4, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of probiotics therapy for the treatment of IBS-D were included and the quality was assessed using the risk of bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook version 5.1.0. RevMan 5.4 software was used to perform the meta-analysis on the outcomes of IBS-D symptoms, abdominal pain, quality of life, and abdominal distension. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence. Results Ten RCTs evaluating 943 patients were identified. Only one study had unclear risk of bias, while nine studies had a high risk of bias. The meta-analysis results showed that, compared to the placebo, probiotics therapy significantly decreased the score of IBS-D symptoms (SMD = - 0.55, 95% CI: [- 0.83, - 0.27], P < 0.05), abdominal pain (SMD = - 0.43, 95% CI: [- 0.57, - 0.29], P < 0.05), and abdominal distension (SMD = - 0.45, 95%CI: [- 0.81, - 0.09], P < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in the quality of life. However, all the certainty of evidence was very low. Conclusion Very low certainty evidence showed that probiotics might be an effective treatment for improving the IBS-D symptoms, abdominal pain, and abdominal distension, in adult IBS-D patients. However, these conclusions should be supported by high-quality evidence.

Background: Gestational diabetes mellitus was associated with increased risks of complications during pregnancy and delivery. The efficacy of probiotics for preventing atopic disease among overweight and obese pregnant women has not been a unified conclusion. Therefore, we aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of probiotics supplementation for overweight and obese pregnant women. Methods: We searched the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials from the earliest publication date available to September 23, 2020, regardless of language or publication status. Two reviewers independently extracted data with a standardized form. When disagreements arose, a third investigator was consulted. Data was pooled using the generic inverse variance method and expressed as mean differences and relative risk with 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was measured and quantified by I-2 statistic. Results: There were no significant differences between probiotics and placebo on GDM (RR = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.81-1.30; P = 0.821; I-2 = 38.7%, P = 0.180), excess gestational weight gain (RR = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.79 -1.06; P = 0.223; I-2 = 91.2%, P = 0.001) and neonatal birth weight (WMD = 28.47; 95% CI, -34.80-91.73; P = 0.383; I-2 = 4.5%, P = 0.381). In addition, probiotics might increase the risk of preeclampsia including superimposed (RR = 1.91; 95% CI, 1.03-3.55; P = 0.001; I-2 = 0.0%, P = 0.994). Conclusions: Probiotics had no better efficacy for prevention of atopic disease in overweight or obese pregnant women. In contrast, excessive probiotics supplementation might increase the risk of preeclampsia. More data will be necessary to determine the prevention efficacy of probiotics with consideration of real-world and other epidemiological settings. (C) 2022 European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of probiotics in the treatment of constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C), we searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotic care versus placebos for patients with IBS-C in five comprehensive databases (March 2022). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. RevMan 5.3 was used to perform a meta-analysis on stool consistency, abdominal pain, bloating, quality of life (QoL), fecal Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus counts, and adverse events. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. Ten RCTs involving 757 patients were included. Only three studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. The meta-analysis results show that, compared to the placebo, probiotics significantly improved stool consistency (MD = 0.72, 95% CI (0.18, 1.26), p 0.05). The low-to-very low certainty evidence suggests that probiotics might improve the stool consistency of patients with IBS-C and increase the number of Bifidobacteria and Lactobacilli in feces with good safety. However, more high-quality studies with large samples are needed to verify the findings.