scholarly journals Probiotic Supplementation in Preterm Infants Does Not Affect the Risk of Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Nutrients ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 1197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo Villamor-Martínez ◽  
Maria Pierro ◽  
Giacomo Cavallaro ◽  
Fabio Mosca ◽  
Boris Kramer ◽  
...  
Foods ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 1540
Author(s):  
Chen Wang ◽  
Chengcheng Zhang ◽  
Sijia Li ◽  
Leilei Yu ◽  
Fengwei Tian ◽  
...  

The effectiveness of probiotic consumption in controlling dyslipidemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been unclear. We reviewed relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to clarify the effect of probiotic intake on dyslipidemia in T2DM patients. The Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed and Cochrane Library databases were used for searching relevant RCTs published up to October 2020. The total cholesterol (TC), triglyceride (TG), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) concentrations were selected as the primary indicators for dyslipidemia. The results of 13 eligible RCTs showed that probiotic intake could significantly reduce TC (SMD: −0.23, 95% CI: (−0.37, −0.10)) and TG (SMD: −0.27, 95% CI: (−0.44, −0.11)) levels, but did not regulate LDL-C or HDL-C concentrations. Subgroup analysis showed that multispecies probiotics (≥two species), but not single-species probiotics, significantly decreased TC and TG concentrations. Furthermore, powder, but not liquid, probiotics could reduce TC and TG concentrations. This meta-analysis demonstrated that probiotic supplementation is helpful in reducing TC and TG concentrations in T2DM patients. However, more well-controlled trials are needed to clarify the benefits of probiotics on dyslipidemia in T2DM patients.


2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seyed Mohammad Aqaeinezhad Rudbane ◽  
Samane Rahmdel ◽  
Seyedeh Maryam Abdollahzadeh ◽  
Morteza Zare ◽  
Azam Bazrafshan ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Karolina Łagowska ◽  
Anna M. Malinowska ◽  
Bogna Zawieja ◽  
Emilia Zawieja

Abstract The aim of this study was to assess the effects of probiotic and synbiotic supplementation on glucose metabolism in pregnant women using data from randomized controlled trials. Furthermore, this meta-analysis examines whether the observed effects depend on the presence or absence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), and if the effect is dependent on the type of supplement used (probiotic or synbiotic). We performed a literature search of databases (Medline, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Library) and identified all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published prior to May 2019. We compared the effects of probiotic supplementation with the administration of placebos in pregnant women with and without GDM. The systematic review and meta-analysis protocol were registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews as number CRD 42019111467. 1119 study participants from 15 selected studies were included. The participants in four studies did not have GDM (being recruited to the study before week 20 of pregnancy) and the participants in the rest of the studies were diagnosed with GDM between weeks 24 and 28 of gestation. The meta-analysis showed that supplementation lowers serum glucose, insulin levels, and HOMA-IR index, but only in pregnant women with GDM. Moreover, both probiotics and synbiotics lower serum insulin level and HOMA-IR index, but the glucose lowering effect is specific only to probiotics and not synbiotics. Probiotic supplementation may improve glucose metabolism in pregnant women with GDM. There is a need for more RCT studies with larger groups to better estimate this effect.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jogender Kumar ◽  
Jitendra Meena ◽  
Pradeep Debata ◽  
Jeeva Mary Sankar ◽  
Praveen Kumar ◽  
...  

Abstract Evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggests that three-hourly feeding is safe and might help achieve full feeds earlier in preterm infants. We systematically compared the benefits and harms of three-hourly and two-hourly feeding schedules in preterm infants. We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus) and trial registries until 30 July 2021 for RCTs comparing the two feeding schedules. We did random-effects meta-analysis using RevMan 5.4 software. The primary outcome was the incidence of stage II or III necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). Other outcomes were the incidence of any stage NEC, sepsis, mortality, time to full enteral feeds, and hospital stay. Six trials (872 participants) are included. There was no significant difference in the incidence of stage II/III NEC (3 trials; 530 participants; RR 1.39; 95% CI: 0.53,3.65; I2 -0%, low certainty), and any stage NEC (5 studies; 767 participants; RR 0.98; 95% CI: 0.53,1.82; I2 0%, very-low certainty) between three and two-hourly feeding groups. There was no difference in the time to achieve full feeds (5 trials; 755 participants; MD: -0.0 days; 95% CI: -0.32, 0.31, low certainty) or other outcomes. On subgroup analysis, neonates with birthweight <1000 grams and in the three-hourly feeding regime achieved full enteral feeds slower than those in the two-hourly feeding group (1 trial; 84 participants; MD: 2.9 days, 95% CI: 1.16, 4.64, low certainty).ConclusionIn stable preterm infants (1000-1500 grams), three-hourly feeding can be followed safely. In infants <1000 grams, two-hourly feeding should be continued till further evidence.Prospero Registration Number: CRD42021246568


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document