Probiotics in the critically ill patient: a double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Efficacy of probiotics or synbiotics in critically ill patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This latest systematic review and meta-analysis aim to examine the effects of probiotic and synbiotic supplementation in critically ill patients.

METHODS

Relevant articles were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Database, and the Web of Science. The primary output measure was the incident of ventilator-associated pneumonia, and the secondary outputs were diarrhea, Clostridium diffusion infection (CDI), incident of sepsis, incident of hospital acquired pneumonia, duration of mechanical exploitation, ICU mortality rate, length of ICU stay, in hospital mortality, and length of hospital stay. Data were pooled and expressed as Relative Risk(RR) and Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) with a 95 % confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

33 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis, with 4065 patients who received probiotics or synbiotics (treatment group) and 3821 patients who received standard care or placebo (control group). The pooled data from all included studies demonstrated that the treatment group has significantly reduced incidence of ventilation-associated pneumonia (VAP) (RR = 0.80; 95 % CI: 0.67-0.96; p = 0.021, I2 = 52.5 %) and sepsis (RR = 0.97; 95 % CI: 0.66-1.42; p = 0.032, I2 = 54.4 %), As well as significantly increased duration of mechanical exploitation (SMD = -0.47; 95 % CI: -0.74-0.20, p = 0.012, I2 = 63.4 %), ICU mobility (RR = 0.95; 95 % CI: 0.71-1.27; p = 0.004, I2 = 62.8 %), length of ICU stay (SMD = -0.29; 95 % CI: -0.58-0.01; p = 0.000, I2 = 82.3 %) and length of hospital stay (SMD = -0.33; 95 % CI: -0.57-0.08, p = 0.000, I2 = 74.2 %) than the control group. There were no significant differences in diarrhea, CDI, incidence of hospital acquired pneumonia, and in hospital mortality between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis showed that probiotic and synbiotic supplements are beneficial for critically ill patients as they significantly reduce the incidence of ventilator associated pneumonia and sepsis, as well as the duration of mechanical exploitation, length of hospital stay, length of ICU stay, and ICU mortality. However, this intervention has minimal impact on diarrhea, CDI, incidence of hospital acquired pneumonia, and in hospital mortality in critically ill patients.

Study on Effects of Probiotics on Gut Microbiome and Clinical Course in Patients with Critical Care Illnesses

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a nosocomial infection contracted by ventilator patients in which bacteria colonize the upper digestive tract and contaminated secretions are released into the lower airway. This nosocomial infection increases the morbidity and mortality of the patients as well as the cost of treatment. Probiotic formulations have recently been proposed to prevent the colonization of these pathogenic bacteria. In this prospective observational study, we aimed to investigate the effects of probiotics on gut microbiota and their relation to clinical outcomes in mechanically ventilated patients. For this study, 35 patients were recruited (22 probiotic-treated and 13 without probiotic treatment) from a cohort of 169 patients. Patients in the probiotic group were given a dose of 6 capsules of a commercially available probiotic (VSL#3®:112.5 billion CFU/cap) in three divided doses for 10 days. Sampling was carried out after each dose to monitor the temporal change in the gut microbiota composition. To profile the microbiota, we used a 16S rRNA metagenomic approach, and differences among the groups were computed using multivariate statistical analyses. Differences in gut microbial diversity (Bray Curtis and Jaccard distance, p-value > 0.05) between the probiotic-treated group and the control group were not observed. Furthermore, treatment with probiotics resulted in the enrichment of Lactobacillus and Streptococcus in the gut microbiota of the probiotic-treated groups. Our results demonstrated that probiotics might lead to favorable alterations in gut microbiome characteristics. Future studies should focus on the appropriate dosages and frequency of probiotics, which can lead to improved clinical outcomes.

Understanding Post-Sepsis Syndrome: How Can Clinicians Help?

Sepsis is a global health challenge, with over 49 million cases annually. Recent medical advancements have increased in-hospital survival rates to approximately 80%, but the escalating incidence of sepsis, owing to an ageing population, rise in chronic diseases, and antibiotic resistance, have also increased the number of sepsis survivors. Subsequently, there is a growing prevalence of "post-sepsis syndrome" (PSS). This syndrome includes long-term physical, medical, cognitive, and psychological issues after recovering from sepsis. PSS puts survivors at risk for hospital readmission and is associated with a reduction in health- and life span, both at short and long term, after hospital discharge. Comprehensive understanding of PSS symptoms and causative factors is vital for developing optimal care for sepsis survivors, a task of prime importance for clinicians. This review aims to elucidate our current knowledge of PSS and its relevance in enhancing post-sepsis care provided by clinicians.

Gut microbiota and sepsis: bidirectional Mendelian study and mediation analysis

Background

There is a growing body of evidence that suggests a connection between the composition of gut microbiota and sepsis. However, more research is needed to better understand the causal relationship between the two. To gain a deeper insight into the association between gut microbiota, C-reactive protein (CRP), and sepsis, we conducted several Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses.

Methods

In this study, publicly available genome-wide association study (GWAS) summary statistics were examined to determine the correlation between gut microbiota and sepsis, including various sepsis subgroups (such as under 75, 28-day death, Critical Care Units (ICU), 28-day death in ICU). Initially, two-sample and reverse Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses were conducted to identify causality between gut microbiota and sepsis. Subsequently, multivariable and two-step MR analyses revealed that the relationship between microbiota and sepsis was mediated by CRP. The robustness of the findings was confirmed through several sensitivity analyses.

Findings

In our study, we revealed positive correlations between 24 taxa and different sepsis outcomes, while 30 taxa demonstrated negative correlations with sepsis outcomes. Following the correction for multiple testing, we found that the Phylum Lentisphaerae (OR: 0.932, p = 2.64E-03), class Lentisphaeria, and order Victivallales (OR: 0.927, p = 1.42E-03) displayed a negative relationship with sepsis risk. In contrast, Phylum Tenericutes and class Mollicutes (OR: 1.274, p = 2.89E-03) were positively related to sepsis risk and death within 28 days. It is notable that Phylum Tenericutes and class Mollicutes (OR: 1.108, p = 1.72E-03) also indicated a positive relationship with sepsis risk in individuals under 75. From our analysis, it was shown that C-reactive protein (CRP) mediated 32.16% of the causal pathway from Phylum Tenericutes and class Mollicutes to sepsis for individuals under 75. Additionally, CRP was found to mediate 31.53% of the effect of the genus Gordonibacter on sepsis. Despite these findings, our reverse analysis did not indicate any influence of sepsis on the gut microbiota and CRP levels.

Conclusion

The study showcased the connection between gut microbiota, CRP, and sepsis, which sheds new light on the potential role of CRP as a mediator in facilitating the impact of gut microbiota on sepsis.

Clinical efficacy of probiotics in prevention of infectious diseases among hospitalized patients in ICU and non-ICU wards in clinical randomized trials: A systematic review

Background and Aims

The present study aimed to review probiotics' clinical efficacy in preventing infectious diseases among hospitalized patients in ICU and non-ICU wards.

Methods

A search of Medline, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Open Grey, and Google Scholar was conducted for eligible publications from 2002 to 2020 following the requirements outlined in the PRISMA guideline. The search strategy was based on the combination of the following terms: "probiotics," "prebiotics," "synbiotics," and "cross-infection." The logical operators "AND" (or the equivalent operator for the databases) and "OR" (e.g., probiotics OR prebiotics OR synbiotics) were used.

Results

The results indicated that the probiotic consumption caused a significant reduction in antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) in 2/8 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating AAD/CDI. Also, 5/12 clinical trials highlighted the considerable effects of probiotics on the reduction or prevention of ventilator associated pneumoniae (VAP), so the mean prevalence of VAP was lower in the probiotic group than in the placebo group. The total rate of nosocomial infections among preterm infants was nonsignificantly higher in the probiotic group compared to the control group.

Conclusion

This systematic review shows that the administration of probiotics has moderate preventive or mitigating effects on the occurrence of VAP in ICU patients, CDI, AAD, and nosocomial infections among children. Consequently, applying antibiotics along with the proper probiotic species can be advantageous.

Postbiotics as potential new therapeutic agents for sepsis

Sepsis is the main cause of death in critically ill patients and gut microbiota dysbiosis plays a crucial role in sepsis. On the one hand, sepsis leads to the destruction of gut microbiota and induces and aggravates terminal organ dysfunction. On the other hand, the activation of pathogenic gut flora and the reduction in beneficial microbial products increase the susceptibility of the host to sepsis. Although probiotics or fecal microbiota transplantation preserve gut barrier function on multiple levels, their efficacy in sepsis with intestinal microbiota disruptions remains uncertain. Postbiotics consist of inactivated microbial cells or cell components. They possess antimicrobial, immunomodulatory, antioxidant and antiproliferative activities. Microbiota-targeted therapy strategies, such as postbiotics, may reduce the incidence of sepsis and improve the prognosis of patients with sepsis by regulating gut microbial metabolites, improving intestinal barrier integrity and changing the composition of the gut microbiota. They offer a variety of mechanisms and might even be superior to more conventional 'biotics' such as probiotics and prebiotics. In this review, we present an overview of the concept of postbiotics and summarize what is currently known about postbiotics and their prospective utility in sepsis therapy. Overall, postbiotics show promise as a viable adjunctive therapy option for sepsis.

Heterogeneity of surrogate outcome measures used in critical care studies: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The choice of outcome measure is a critical decision in the design of any clinical trial, but many Phase III clinical trials in critical care fail to detect a difference between the interventions being compared. This may be because the surrogate outcomes used to show beneficial effects in early phase trials (which informed the design of the subsequent Phase III trials) are not valid guides to the differences between the interventions for the main outcomes of the Phase III trials. We undertook a systematic review (1) to generate a list of outcome measures used in critical care trials, (2) to determine the variability in the outcome reporting in the respiratory subgroup and (3) to create a smaller list of potential early phase endpoints in the respiratory subgroup.

METHODS

Data related to outcomes were extracted from studies published in the six top-ranked critical care journals between 2010 and 2020. Outcomes were classified into subcategories and categories. A subset of early phase endpoints relevant to the respiratory subgroup was selected for further investigation. The variability of the outcomes and the variability in reporting was investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 6905 references were retrieved and a total of 294 separate outcomes were identified from 58 studies. The outcomes were then classified into 11 categories and 66 subcategories. A subset of 22 outcomes relevant for the respiratory group were identified as potential early phase outcomes. The summary statistics, time points and definitions show the outcomes are analysed and reported in different ways.

CONCLUSION

The outcome measures were defined, analysed and reported in a variety of ways. This creates difficulties for synthesising data in systematic reviews and planning definitive trials. This review once again highlights an urgent need for standardisation and validation of surrogate outcomes reported in critical care trials. Future work should aim to validate and develop a core outcome set for surrogate outcomes in critical care trials.

Investigating the effect of oral synbiotic on enteral feeding tolerance in critically ill patients: A double-blinded controlled clinical trial of gut microbiota

BACKGROUND

Probiotics are beneficial live microorganisms that can modify the gut microbiota. It is assumed that they help improve enteral feeding intolerance (EFI) and nosocomial infections in critically ill patients. The present clinical trial aimed to investigate the efficacy of synbiotics in improving EFI and oropharyngeal aspiration in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

This randomized clinical trial was conducted on 105 critically ill patients admitted to the ICU of a tertiary referral hospital affiliated with a medical university. The patients were randomly assigned to either a synbiotic or control group and underwent 7 days of investigation. The primary end point was reduced gastric residual volume, which is suggestive of an improvement in EFI. The secondary end point included requirement for prokinetics, frequency of aspiration, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, and level of consciousness.

RESULTS

The present clinical trial showed that synbiotic intervention has resulted in a significantly diminished requirement for prokinetics (P = 0.019), fewer oropharyngeal aspirations (P = 0.01), improved volume of bolus administration, and decreased gastric residual volume during the 7-day follow-up period. The patients who received synbiotic had an improved level of consciousness (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This clinical trial showed that the prescription of synbiotic from the initial days of enteral feeding has resulted in a significantly diminished requirement for prokinetics, less oropharyngeal aspiration, decreased gastric residual volume, improved volume of bolus administration, and hence, better tolerance of enteral feeding.

Benefits and harm of probiotics and synbiotics in adult critically ill patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials concluded that probiotics administration in critically ill patients was safe and associated with reduced rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia and diarrhea. However, a recent large multicenter trial found probiotics administration, compared to placebo, was not efficacious and increased adverse events. An updated meta-analysis that controls for type-1 and -2 errors using trial sequential analysis, with a detailed account of adverse events associated with probiotic administration, is warranted to confirm the safety and efficacy of probiotic use in critically ill patients.

METHODS

RCTs that compared probiotics or synbiotics to usual care or placebo and reported clinical and diarrheal outcomes were searched in 4 electronic databases from inception to March 8, 2022 without language restriction. Four reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the study qualities using the Critical Care Nutrition (CCN) Methodological Quality Scoring System. Random-effect meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were used to synthesize the results. The primary outcome was ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). The main subgroup analysis compared the effects of higher versus lower quality studies (based on median CCN score).

RESULTS

Seventy-five studies with 71 unique trials (n = 8551) were included. In the overall analysis, probiotics significantly reduced VAP incidence (risk ratio [RR] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.88; I² = 65%; 16 studies). However, such benefits were demonstrated only in lower (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32, 0.69; I² = 44%; 7 studies) but not higher quality studies (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73, 1.08; I² = 43%; 9 studies), with significant test for subgroup differences (p = 0.004). Additionally, TSA showed that the VAP benefits of probiotics in the overall and subgroup analyses were type-1 errors. In higher quality trials, TSA found that future trials are unlikely to demonstrate any benefits of probiotics on infectious complications and diarrhea. Probiotics had higher adverse events than control (pooled risk difference: 0.01, 95% CI 0.01, 0.02; I² = 0%; 22 studies).

CONCLUSION

High-quality RCTs did not support a beneficial effect of probiotics on clinical or diarrheal outcomes in critically ill patients. Given the lack of benefits and the increased incidence of adverse events, probiotics should not be routinely administered to critically ill patients.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42022302278.

Probiotics in Critical Illness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES

To determine the safety and efficacy of probiotics or synbiotics on morbidity and mortality in critically ill adults and children.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and unpublished sources from inception to May 4, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

We performed a systematic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared enteral probiotics or synbiotics to placebo or no treatment in critically ill patients. We screened studies independently and in duplicate.

DATA EXTRACTION

Independent reviewers extracted data in duplicate. A random-effects model was used to pool data. We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using the Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Sixty-five RCTs enrolled 8,483 patients. Probiotics may reduce ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) (relative risk [RR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.89 and risk difference [RD], 6.9% reduction; 95% CI, 2.7-10.2% fewer; low certainty), healthcare-associated pneumonia (HAP) (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55-0.89; RD, 5.5% reduction; 95% CI, 8.2-2.0% fewer; low certainty), ICU length of stay (LOS) (mean difference [MD], 1.38 days fewer; 95% CI, 0.57-2.19 d fewer; low certainty), hospital LOS (MD, 2.21 d fewer; 95% CI, 1.18-3.24 d fewer; low certainty), and duration of invasive mechanical ventilation (MD, 2.53 d fewer; 95% CI, 1.31-3.74 d fewer; low certainty). Probiotics probably have no effect on mortality (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.87-1.04 and RD, 1.1% reduction; 95% CI, 2.8% reduction to 0.8% increase; moderate certainty). Post hoc sensitivity analyses without high risk of bias studies negated the effect of probiotics on VAP, HAP, and hospital LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Low certainty RCT evidence suggests that probiotics or synbiotics during critical illness may reduce VAP, HAP, ICU and hospital LOS but probably have no effect on mortality.

Probiotic Supplementation Prevents the Development of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia for Mechanically Ventilated ICU Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is one of the common critical complications of nosocomial infection (NI) in invasive mechanically ventilated intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The efficacy of total parenteral nutrition (TPN), enteral nutrition and/or adjuvant peripheral parenteral nutrition (EPN) supplemented with or without probiotic, prebiotic, and synbiotic therapies in preventing VAP among these patients has been questioned. We aimed to systematically and comprehensively summarize all available studies to generate the best evidence of VAP prevention for invasive mechanically ventilated ICU patients.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the administration of TPN, EPN, probiotics-supplemented EPN, prebiotics-supplemented EPN, and synbiotics-supplemented EPN for VAP prevention in invasive mechanically ventilated ICU patients were systematically retrieved from four electronic databases. The incidence of VAP was the primary outcome and was determined by the random-effects model of a Bayesian framework. The secondary outcomes were NI, ICU and hospital mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay, and mechanical ventilation duration. The registration number of Prospero is CRD42020195773.

Results

A total of 8339 patients from 31 RCTs were finally included in network meta-analysis. The primary outcome showed that probiotic-supplemented EPN had a higher correlation with the alleviation of VAP than EPN in critically invasive mechanically ventilated patients (odds ratio [OR] 0.75; 95% credible intervals [CrI] 0.58–0.95). Subgroup analyses showed that probiotic-supplemented EPN prevented VAP in trauma patients (OR 0.30; 95% CrI 0.13–0.83), mixed probiotic strain therapy was more effective in preventing VAP than EPN therapy (OR 0.55; 95% CrI 0.31–0.97), and low-dose probiotic therapy (less than 10¹⁰ CFU per day) was more associated with lowered incidence of VAP than EPN therapy (OR 0.16; 95% CrI 0.04–0.64). Secondary outcomes indicated that synbiotic-supplemented EPN therapy was more significantly related to decreased incidence of NI than EPN therapy (OR 0.34; 95% CrI 0.11–0.85). Prebiotic-supplemented EPN administration was the most effective in preventing diarrhea (OR 0.05; 95% CrI 0.00–0.71).

Conclusion

Probiotic supplementation shows promise in reducing the incidence of VAP in critically invasive mechanically ventilated patients. Currently, low quality of evidence reduces strong clinical recommendations. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to conclusively prove these findings.

Systamatic Review Registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020195773], identifier [CRD42020195773].

Pro-, pre- and synbiotics for the prevention of incidental ventilator-associated pneumonia among critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the preventive effects of pro-, pre- and synbiotics on ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) among critically ill patients.

METHODS

The PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for relevant articles written before 19 February 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical efficacy of pro-, pre- and synbiotics with placebos or standard treatments for the prevention of incidental VAP were included.

RESULTS

A total of 15 RCTs were included. Patients receiving pro-, pre- and synbiotics had a lower risk than the control group of contracting VAP (risk ratio [RR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57-0.85; I² = 67%). The duration of mechanical ventilation was significantly shorter in the study group than in the control group (mean difference [MD], -1.61 days; 95% CI, -2.72 to -0.50; I² = 86%), and the study group had a shorter duration of stay in the intensive care unit than the control group did (MD, -1.72 days; 95% CI, -3.22 to -0.23; I² = 87%).

CONCLUSIONS

Pro-, pre- and synbiotics can prevent VAP and the use of probiotics for patients who are critically ill should be supported.

Probiotic in the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients: evidence from meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Probiotic might have a role in the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) among mechanically ventilated patients, but the efficacy and safety remained inconsistent. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of probiotic (prebiotic, synbiotic) versus placebo in preventing VAP in critically ill patients undergoing mechanical ventilation.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library databases were searched to 10 October 2021 without language restriction for randomized or semi-randomized controlled trials evaluating probiotic (prebiotic, synbiotic) vs. placebo in prevention of VAP in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients. The pooled relative risk (RR) along with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were combined using a random-effects model. Furthermore, the trial sequential analysis (TSA) and subgroup analyses were performed. Statistical significance was regarded as P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Twenty-three trials involving 5543 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis. The combined RR of decreasing the risk of VAP by probiotic was 0.67 (0.56, 0.81) for all eligible studies, 0.69 (n = 5136; 95% CI = 0.57 to 0.84; P < 0.01) for adults studies and 0.55 (n = 407; 95%CI = 0.31 to 0.99; P = 0.046) for neonates/children studies. Additionally, the above-mentioned positive finding in 20 adults studies was verified by the results of TSA, subgroup analyses and cumulative meta-analysis. Ample evidences demonstrated a 31% decrease in RR of incidence of VAP was noted when prophylactic probiotic therapy was administrated among adult patients. Finally, there were no effects on the ICU/hospital/28-/90-day mortality, bacteremia, CRBSI, diarrhea, ICU-acquired infections, infectious complications, pneumonia, UTI and wound infection between two groups (P > 0.05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of our study, the current evidences suggested that prophylactic administration of probiotic might be utilized as a preventive method for VAP in neonates/children and adults patients who required mechanical ventilation. However, further large, high-quality RCTs are warranted to assess the efficacy and safety of probiotic treatment in critically ill patients, especially for the neonates/children studies and the long-term consequences of this therapy.

Probiotics for the Prevention of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Background: Presently, there is conflicting evidence regarding the efficacy of probiotics in the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). This meta-analysis was conducted to update current clinical evidence and evaluate the efficacy and safety of probiotics for the prevention of VAP. Methods: We searched three databases and two trial registers to retrieve randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics or synbiotics with placebo or standard treatment for the prevention of VAP in adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU). Results: Our meta-analysis included 18 RCTs involving 4893 patients. Our results showed that probiotics may reduce the incidence of VAP (RR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.55–0.84; low certainty). However, in our subgroup and sensitivity analyses, the effect was not significant in double-blind studies, and in studies with a low risk of bias in the randomisation process. Probiotics reduced the length of ICU stay (MD −2.22 days, 95% CI: −4.17 to −0.28; moderate certainty) and the duration of antibiotic use (MD −1.25 days, 95% CI −1.86 to −0.64; moderate certainty). Conclusions: Probiotics may reduce the incidence of VAP but due to the low quality of pooled evidence, the use of probiotics warrants caution. Further, large-scale, high-quality RCTs need to be conducted to provide conclusive evidence.

Efficacy of probiotics or synbiotics for critically ill adult patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Microbial dysbiosis in critically ill patients is a leading cause of mortality and septic complications. Probiotics and synbiotics have emerged as novel therapy on gut microbiota to prevent septic complications. However, current evidence on their effects is conflicting. This work aims to systematically review the impact of probiotics or synbiotics in critically ill adult patients.

Methods

A comprehensive search of the PubMed, CBM, Embase, CENTRAL, ISI, and CNKI databases was performed to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluate probiotics or synbiotics in critically ill patients. The quality assessment was based on the modified Jadad's score scale and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1. The major outcome measure was mortality. Secondary outcomes included incidence of septic complications, sepsis incidence, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, incidence of non-septic complication, and ventilator day. Data synthesis was conduct by Review Manager 5.4.

Results

A total of 25 randomized controlled trials reporting on 5049 critically ill patients were included. In the intervention group, 2520 participants received probiotics or synbiotics, whereas 2529 participants received standard care or placebo. Pooling data from randomized controlled trials demonstrated a significant reduction in the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in the treatment group [(risk ratio (RR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.78–0.95; p < 0.003, I² = 85%)]. However, in the subgroup analysis, the reduction of incidence of VAP was only significant in patients receiving synbiotics (RR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.47–0.80, p = 0.0004, I² = 40%) and not significant in those receiving only probiotics (RR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.82–1.01, p = 0.07, I² = 65%). Moreover, sepsis incidence of critically ill patients was only significantly reduced by the addition of synbiotics (RR = 0.41; 95% CI: 0.22–0.72, p = 0.005, I² = 0%). The incidence of ICU-acquired infections was significantly reduced by the synbiotics therapy (RR = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.58–0.89, p = 0.0007, I² = 79%). There was no significant difference in mortality, diarrhea, or length of ICU stay between the treatment and control groups.

Conclusions

Synbiotics is an effective and safe nutrition therapy in reducing septic complications in critically ill patients. However, in such patients, administration of probiotics alone compared with placebo resulted in no difference in the septic complications.

Clinical Benefits From Administering Probiotics to Mechanical Ventilated Patients in Intensive Care Unit: A PRISMA-Guided Meta-Analysis

Background

The use of probiotics has been considered as a new intervention for ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) prevention in the intensive care unit (ICU). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of probiotics on mechanical-ventilated patients in ICU.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from their respective inception through October 10, 2021. All studies meeting the inclusion criteria were selected to evaluate the effect of probiotics on patients receiving mechanical ventilation in ICU.

Results

A total of 15 studies involving 4,693 participants met our inclusion criterion and were included in this meta-analysis. The incidence of VAP in the probiotic group was significantly lower (odds ratio [OR] 0.58, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.81; p = 0.002; I² = 71%). However, a publication bias may be present as the test of asymmetry was significant (p = 0.007). The probiotic administration was associated with a significant reduction in the duration of mechanical ventilation (mean difference [MD] −1.57, 95% CI −3.12 to −0.03; p = 0.05; inconsistency [I]² = 80%), length of ICU stay (MD −1.87, 95% CI −3.45 to −0.28; p = 0.02; I² = 76%), and incidence of bacterial colonization (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.78; p = 0.0001; I² = 34%). Moreover, no statistically significant differences were observed regarding the incidence of diarrhea (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.25; p = 0.54; I² = 12%) and mortality (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05; p = 0.19; I² = 0%) between probiotics group and control group.

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis shows that probiotics are associated with a reduction in VAP, as well as the duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, and bacterial colonization, but no significant effects on ICU mortality and occurrence of diarrhea. However, in consideration of the significant heterogeneity and publication bias, our findings need to be further validated.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42020150770.

Probiotic prophylaxis to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia in children on mechanical ventilation: A randomized double-blind clinical trial

PURPOSE

Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia (VAP) is one of the most common nosocomial infections in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU). Using new strategies to prevent nosocomial infections is crucial to avoid antibiotic resistance. One of these strategies is the utilization of probiotics. This study aims to investigate the efficacy of probiotic prophylaxis in preventing VAP in mechanically ventilated children.

METHOD

This study was a randomized, double-blind clinical trial. The study included 72 children under 12 years of age under mechanical ventilation for more than 48 h in the Mofid Children's Hospital. Patients were randomly divided into Limosilactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938 probiotic recipients (n = 38) and placebo groups (n = 34). In addition to the standard treatment, both groups received a sachet containing probiotics or a placebo twice a day. Children were screened for VAP based on clinical and laboratory evidence.

RESULTS

The mean age of children in the intervention and placebo groups was 4.60 ± 4.84 and 3.38 ± 3.49 years, respectively. After adjusting the other variables, it was observed that chance of VAP among probiotics compared to the placebo group was significantly decreased (OR adjusted = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.09-0.95). Also, probiotic was associated with a significantly lower chance of diarrhea than the placebo group (OR adjusted = 0.09; 95% CI: 0.01-0.96).

CONCLUSION

Probiotic utilization is effective in preventing the incidence of VAP and diarrhea in children under mechanical ventilation in the PICU.

Gut-lung cross talk in COVID-19 pathology and fatality rate

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the leading pandemic facing the world in 2019/2020; it is caused by a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, which necessitates clear understanding of the infectious agent. The virus manifests aggressive behavior with severe clinical presentation and high mortality rate, especially among the elderly and patients living with chronic diseases. In the recent years, the role of gut microbiota, in health and disease, has been progressively studied and highlighted. It is through gut microbiota-organ bidirectional pathways, such as gut-brain axis, gut-liver axis, and gut-lung axis, that the role of gut microbiota in prompting lung disease, among other diseases, has been proposed and accepted. It is also known that respiratory viral infections, such as COVID-19, induce alterations in the gut microbiota, which can influence immunity. Based on the fact that gut microbiota diversity is decreased in old age and in patients with certain chronic diseases, which constitute two of the primary fatality groups in COVID-19 infections, it can be assumed that the gut microbiota may play a role in COVID-19 pathology and fatality rate. Improving gut microbiota diversity through personalized nutrition and supplementation with prebiotics/probiotics will mend the immunity of the body and hence could be one of the prophylactic strategies by which the impact of COVID-19 can be minimized in the elderly and immunocompromised patients. In this chapter, the role of dysbiosis in COVID-19 will be clarified and the possibility of using co-supplementation of personalized prebiotics/probiotics with current therapies will be discussed.

Crosstalk between gut microbiota and sepsis

Sepsis is an overwhelming inflammatory response to microbial infection. Sepsis management remains a clinical challenge. The role of the gut microbiome in sepsis has gained some attention. Recent evidence has demonstrated that gut microbiota regulate host physiological homeostasis mediators, including the immune system, gut barrier function and disease susceptibility pathways. Therefore, maintenance or restoration of microbiota and metabolite composition might be a therapeutic or prophylactic target against critical illness. Fecal microbiota transplantation and supplementation of probiotics are microbiota-based treatment methods that are somewhat limited in terms of evidence-based efficacy. This review focuses on the importance of the crosstalk between the gastrointestinal ecosystem and sepsis to highlight novel microbiota-targeted therapies to improve the outcomes of sepsis treatment.

Effects of Probiotics in Conditions or Infections Similar to COVID-19 on Health Outcomes: An Evidence Analysis Center Scoping Review

Probiotics have been suggested as a potential intervention for improving outcomes, particularly ventilatory-associated pneumonia, in patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, with the rapid development of the COVID-19 pandemic, there is little direct evidence available in infected patients. The objective of this scoping review is to examine the availability and nature of literature describing the effect of probiotics in adults with conditions or infections similar to COVID-19 infection on related health outcomes. MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Databases were searched for studies published from 1999 to May 1, 2020, examining the effect of probiotics in conditions applicable to individuals infected with COVID-19, including, but not limited to, other forms of coronavirus, critical illness, and mechanical ventilation. The databases search identified 1925 unique articles, 77 full-text articles were reviewed, and 48 studies were included in this scoping review, including 31 primary studies and 17 systematic reviews. Primary studies examined a range of interventions that varied by probiotic diversity and types, including 8 studies that focused on synbiotics, which include both pre- and probiotics. Several systematic reviews examined the effect of probiotics on ventilator-associated pneumonia and other infections. Although most systematic reviews concluded probiotics may improve these outcomes, most systematic review authors concluded that the evidence was low in quality and high in heterogeneity. In the absence of direct evidence with patients infected with COVID-19, studies in comparable populations are currently the best resource to guide probiotics interventions in conjunction with clinical expertise and multidisciplinary health care planning.

Synbiotic Therapy Prevents Nosocomial Infection in Critically Ill Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Based on a Bayesian Framework

Background: The efficacy of synbiotics, probiotics, prebiotics, enteral nutrition or adjuvant peripheral parenteral nutrition (EPN) and total parenteral nutrition (TPN) in preventing nosocomial infection (NI) in critically ill adults has been questioned. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate and rank the effectiveness of these therapies on NI amongst critically ill adults.

Methods: Four electronic databases were systematically searched up to June 30, 2019 for RCTs comparing the administration of probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, EPN and TPN in critically ill adults. The primary outcome was NI. The relative efficacy of all outcomes was determined by a Bayesian framework with random effects NMA. We estimated the odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) and ranked the comparative effects of all regimens with the surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities. The study has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42019147032).

Results: Fifty-five RCTs (7,119 patients) were identified. Primary outcome showed that synbiotics had the best effect in preventing NI than EPN (OR 0.37; 95% CrI 0.22–0.61), probiotics followed (OR 0.52; 95% CrI 0.34–0.77), whereas TPN significantly increased NI (OR 2.29; 95% CrI 1.48–3.67). Subgroup analysis showed that TPN significantly increased NI in intensive care unit (ICU) patients (OR 1.57; 95% CrI 1.01–2.56) and severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) patients (OR 3.93; 95% CrI 1.74–9.15). Secondary outcomes showed that synbiotics were more effective in preventing hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) (OR 0.34; 95% CrI 0.11–0.85), catheter-related bloodstream infection (OR 0.08; 95% CrI 0.01–0.80), urinary tract infection (OR 0.27; 95% CrI 0.08–0.71) and sepsis (OR 0.34; 95% CrI 0.16–0.70) than EPN. Amongst the treatments, probiotics were most effective for shortening the mechanical ventilation duration (MD −3.93; 95% CrI −7.98 to −0.02), prebiotics were most effective for preventing diarrhea (OR 0.24; 95% CrI 0.05–0.94) and TPN was the least effective in shortening hospital length of stay (MD 4.23; 95% CrI 0.97–7.33).

Conclusions: Amongst the five therapies, synbiotics not only prevented NI in critically ill adults but also demonstrated the best treatment results. By contrast, TPN did not prevent NI and ranked last, especially in ICU and SAP patients.

Take-Home Message: Nosocomial infection is a leading cause of mortality in critically ill patients in the ICU. However, the efficacy of synbiotics, probiotics, prebiotics, enteral nutrition or adjuvant peripheral parenteral nutrition and total parenteral nutrition in preventing nosocomial infection in critically ill adults has been questioned. The network meta-analysis provides evidence that amongst the five therapies, synbiotics not only prevented NI in critically ill adults but also demonstrated the best treatment results. By contrast, TPN did not prevent NI and ranked last, especially in ICU and SAP patients. The results of this study will provide a new scientific basis and a new idea for the debate on the efficacy of synbiotics and other treatments in the improvement of prognosis in critically ill adult patients.

Tweet: Synbiotic prevents nosocomial infection in critically ill adults, while total parenteral nutrition has the adverse curative.

Nutritional Status and the Critically Ill Patient: Gut Microbiota and Immuno-Nutrition in I.C.U. at the Time of SARS-COV 2 Pandemic

Background: Gut microbiota is a complex ecosystem of bacteria, viruses, archaea, protozoa and yeasts in our intestine. It has several functions, including maintaining human body equilibrium. Microbial “dysbiosis” can be responsible for outbreak of local and systemic infections, especially in critically ill patients. Methods: to build a narrative review, we performed a Pubmed, Medline and EMBASE search for English language papers, reviews, meta-analyses, case series and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by keywords and their associations: critically ill patient; nutrition; gut microbiota; probiotics; gut virome; SARS-COV 2. Results: Over the antibiotic-based “selective decontamination”, potentially responsible for drug-resistant microorganisms development, there is growing interest of scientists and the pharmaceutical industry for pre-, probiotics and their associations as safe and reliable remedies restoring gut microbial “eubiosis”. Very first encouraging evidences link different gut microbiota profiles with SARS-COV 2 disease stage and gravity. Thus, there is frame for a probiotic therapeutic approach of COVID-19. Conclusions: gut microbiota remodulation seems to be a promising and safe therapeutic approach to prevent local and systemic multi-resistant bug infections in the intensive care unit (ICU) patients. This approach deserves more and more attention at the time of SARS-COV 2 pandemic.

Effect of gut microbiota modulation on feeding tolerance of enterally fed critically ill adult patients: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of pre-, pro-, and synbiotics on feeding tolerance of enterally fed critically ill adult patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Science Direct, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to November 2019. English language randomized controlled trials reporting the effect of pre, pro or synbiotics on the feeding tolerance of enterally fed critically ill adult patients were included.

RESULTS

Overall, 15 papers were selected for review. Among six studies reporting the energy intake, only two studies showed significantly higher energy intake in the prebiotic-receiving groups. Among four RCTs reporting frequency or time to achieve the target calorie, only one found a significant effect of probiotics to reduce the time to achieve a target dose of calorie. About the prevalence or duration of diarrhea, 7 out of 12 RCTs reported a beneficial effect. All but one study found no beneficial effects for gut microbiota manipulation on clinical endpoints including length of stay (LOS) in hospital and intensive care unit (ICU).

CONCLUSION

It should be noticed that the heterogeneity in study designs, product format, and ICU patient populations makes it difficult to draw any general conclusion. Overall, it seems that pre, pro, or synbiotics have no significant beneficial effect on feeding tolerance and clinical endpoints in critically ill adults, but they may reduce the prevalence or duration of diarrhea.

Do probiotics help prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients? A systematic review with meta-analysis

Background

Probiotic treatments might contribute to the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Due to its unclear clinical effects, here we intend to assess the preventive effect and safety of probiotics on intensive care unit (ICU) patients.

Methods

Eligible randomised controlled trials were selected in databases until 30 September 2019. The characteristics of the studies were extracted, including study design, definition of VAP, probiotics intervention, category of included patients, incidence of VAP, mortality, duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) and ICU stay. Heterogeneity was evaluated by Chi-squared and I² tests.

Results

15 studies involving 2039 patients were identified for analysis. The pooled analysis suggests significant reduction on VAP (risk ratio, 0.68; 95% Cl, 0.60 to 0.77; p<0.00001) in a fixed-effects model. Subgroup analyses performed on the category of clinical and microbiological criteria both support the above conclusion; however, there were no significant differences in duration of MV or length of ICU stay in a random-effects model. Also, no significant differences in total mortality, overall mortality, 28-day mortality or 90-day mortality were found in the fixed-effects model.

Conclusions

The probiotics helped to prevent VAP without impacting the duration of MV, length of ICU stay or mortality.

Preventive Effect of Probiotics on Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: A Meta-analysis of 2428 Patients

BACKGROUND

Researchers had contradictory conclusions about the role of probiotics in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), which has led to the controversial use of probiotics in mechanically ventilated patients.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the efficacy and safety of probiotics in preventing VAP.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in 7 medical databases. Two investigators assessed literature quality independently and collected data. The primary outcome was the incidence of VAP. Secondary outcomes included 16 measures. Sensitivity analysis and subgroup and meta-regression analyses were performed to analyze the source of heterogeneity. P values <0.05 were considered statistically significant, and CIs were set at 95%. A random-effects model was set when I² <50%, otherwise a fixed-effects model was used.

RESULTS

A total of 20 randomized controlled studies with a total of 2428 patients were analyzed. Pooled results showed positive effects of probiotics on the reduction of VAP incidence (risk ratio [RR] = 0.672; P < 0.001; I² = 11.3%), length of ICU stay (WMD = -1.417; P = 0.012; I² = 90.7%), oropharyngeal (RR = 0.866; P = 0.031; I² = 12.4%) and gastric (RR = 0.645; P < 0.001; I² = 30.2%) colonization.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Probiotics can reduce the incidence of VAP and reduce oropharyngeal and gastric bacterial colonization. The results also suggest that probiotics do not cause adverse effects.

Efficacy of probiotics in the prevention of VAP in critically ill ICU patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials

Introduction

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is reported as the second most common nosocomial infection among critically ill patients with the incidence ranging from 2 to 16 episodes per 1000 ventilator days. The use of probiotics has been shown to have a promising effect in many RCTs. Our systematic review and meta-analysis were thus planned to determine the effect of probiotic use in critically ill ventilated adult patients on the incidence of VAP, length of hospital stay, length of ICU stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, the incidence of diarrhea, and the incidence of oropharyngeal colonization and in-hospital mortality.

Methodology

Systematic search of various databases (such as Embase, Cochrane, and Pubmed), published journals, clinical trials, and abstracts of the various major conferences were made to obtain the RCTs which compare probiotics with placebo for VAP prevention. The results were expressed as risk ratios or mean differences. Data synthesis was done using statistical software - Review Manager (RevMan) Version 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020).

Results

Nine studies met our inclusion criterion and were included in the meta-analysis. The incidence of VAP (risk ratio: 0.70, CI 0.56, 0.88; P = 0.002; I² = 37%), duration of mechanical ventilation (mean difference −3.75, CI −6.93, −0.58; P 0.02; I² = 96%), length of ICU stay (mean difference −4.20, CI −6.73, −1.66; P = 0.001; I² = 84%) and in-hospital mortality (OR 0.73, CI 0.54, 0.98; P = 0.04; I² = 0%) in the probiotic group was significantly lower than that in the control group. Probiotic administration was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in length of hospital stay (MD −1.94, CI −7.17, 3.28; P = 0.47; I² = 88%), incidence of oro-pharyngeal colonization (OR 0.59, CI 0.33, 1.04; P = 0.07; I² = 69%), and incidence of diarrhea (OR 0.59, CI 0.34, 1.03; P = 0.06; I² = 38%).

Discussion

Our meta-analysis shows that probiotic administration has a promising role in lowering the incidence of VAP, the duration of mechanical ventilation, length of ICU stay, and in-hospital mortality.

Impact of microbiome-based interventions on gastrointestinal pathogen colonization in the intensive care unit

In the intensive care unit (ICU), colonization of the gastrointestinal tract by potentially pathogenic bacteria is common and often precedes clinical infection. Though effective in the short term, traditional antibiotic-based decolonization methods may contribute to rising resistance in the long term. Novel therapies instead focus on restoring gut microbiome equilibrium to achieve pathogen colonization resistance. This review summarizes the existing data regarding microbiome-based approaches to gastrointestinal pathogen colonization in ICU patients with a focus on prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics.

Study protocol for the safety and efficacy of probiotic therapy on days alive and out of hospital in adult ICU patients: the multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled Restoration Of gut microflora in Critical Illness Trial (ROCIT)

INTRODUCTION

The effect of early and sustained administration of daily probiotic therapy on patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) remains uncertain.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Restoration Of gut microflora in Critical Illness Trial (ROCIT) study is a multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, two-sided superiority trial that will enrol 220 patients in five ICUs. Adult patients who are within 48 hours of admission to an ICU and are expected to require intensive care beyond the next calendar day will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive early and sustained Lactobacillus plantarum 299v probiotic therapy in addition to usual care or placebo in addition to usual care. The primary endpoint is days alive and out of hospital to day 60.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

ROCIT has been approved by the South Metropolitan Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (ref: RGS00000004) and the St John of God Health Care Human Research Ethics Committee (ref: 1183). The trial results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR12617000783325); Pre-results.

Gut microbiota in surgical and critically ill patients

Microbiota-defined as a collection of microbial organisms colonising different parts of the human body-is now recognised as a pivotal element of human health, and explains a large part of the variance in the phenotypic expression of many diseases. A reduction in microbiota diversity, and replacement of normal microbes with non-commensal, pathogenic or more virulent microbes in the gastrointestinal tract-also known as gut dysbiosis-is now considered to play a causal role in the pathogenesis of many acute and chronic diseases. Results from animal and human studies suggest that dysbiosis is linked to cardiovascular and metabolic disease through changes to microbiota-derived metabolites, including trimethylamine-N-oxide and short-chain fatty acids. Dysbiosis can occur within hours of surgery or the onset of critical illness, even without the administration of antibiotics. These pathological changes in microbiota may contribute to important clinical outcomes, including surgical infection, bowel anastomotic leaks, acute kidney injury, respiratory failure and brain injury. As a strategy to reduce dysbiosis, the use of probiotics (live bacterial cultures that confer health benefits) or synbiotics (probiotic in combination with food that encourages the growth of gut commensal bacteria) in surgical and critically ill patients has been increasingly reported to confer important clinical benefits, including a reduction in ventilator-associated pneumonia, bacteraemia and length of hospital stay, in small randomised controlled trials. However, the best strategy to modulate dysbiosis or counteract its potential harms remains uncertain and requires investigation by a well-designed, adequately powered, randomised controlled trial.

Genomic and epidemiological evidence of bacterial transmission from probiotic capsule to blood in ICU patients

Probiotics are routinely administered to hospitalized patients for many potential indications1 but have been associated with adverse effects that may outweigh their potential benefits2-7. It is particularly alarming that probiotic strains can cause bacteremia8,9, yet direct evidence for an ancestral link between blood isolates and administered probiotics is lacking. Here we report a markedly higher risk of Lactobacillus bacteremia for intensive care unit (ICU) patients treated with probiotics compared to those not treated, and provide genomics data that support the idea of direct clonal transmission of probiotics to the bloodstream. Whole-genome-based phylogeny showed that Lactobacilli isolated from treated patients' blood were phylogenetically inseparable from Lactobacilli isolated from the associated probiotic product. Indeed, the minute genetic diversity among the blood isolates mostly mirrored pre-existing genetic heterogeneity found in the probiotic product. Some blood isolates also contained de novo mutations, including a non-synonymous SNP conferring antibiotic resistance in one patient. Our findings support that probiotic strains can directly cause bacteremia and adaptively evolve within ICU patients.

Synbiotics for prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a probiotics strain-specific network meta-analysis

Objective

Probiotics may be efficacious in preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to clarify the efficacy of different types of probiotics for preventing VAP.

Methods

This systematic review and NMA was conducted according to the updated preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic literature search of public databases from inception to 17 June 2018 was performed.

Results

NMA showed that “Bifidobacterium longum + Lactobacillus bulgaricus + Streptococcus thermophiles” was more efficacious than “Ergyphilus” in preventing VAP (odds ratio: 0.15, 95% confidence interval: 0.03–0.94). According to pairwise meta-analysis, “B. longum + L. bulgaricus + S. thermophiles” and “Lactobacillus rhamnosus” were superior to placebo in preventing VAP. Treatment rank based on surface under the cumulative ranking curves revealed that the most efficacious treatment for preventing VAP was “B. longum + L. bulgaricus + S. thermophiles” (66%). In terms of reducing hospital mortality and ICU mortality, the most efficacious treatment was Synbiotic 2000FORTE (34% and 46%, respectively).

Conclusions

Based on efficacy ranking, “B. longum + L. bulgaricus + S. thermophiles” should be the first choice for prevention of VAP, while Synbiotic 2000FORTE has the potential to reduce in-hospital mortality and ICU mortality.

Manipulation of the microbiome in critical illness-probiotics as a preventive measure against ventilator-associated pneumonia

Objective

To describe the possible modes of action of probiotics and provide a systematic review of the current evidence on the efficacy of probiotics to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in critically ill patients.

Methods

We conducted an unrestricted search of the English language medical literature. For each individual study, the relative risk of VAP was calculated using the reported primary outcome data.

Results

The search identified a total of 72 articles. Eight articles enrolling a total of 1229 patients fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. In four trials, the investigators were blinded for the intervention, and two trials used an intention-to-treat analysis. Loss to follow-up with regard to the primary endpoint ranged from 0 to 14% in the intervention groups and from 0 to 16% in the control groups. The incidence of VAP expressed as the percentage of studied patients was reported in seven trials. The incidence of VAP ranged from 4 to 36% in the intervention groups and from 13 to 50% in the control groups. The relative risk for VAP ranged between 0.30 and 1.41. Three trials showed a significant difference in favor of probiotic therapy between the intervention and the control groups.

Conclusions

The incidence of VAP tended to be lower in patients treated with probiotics in most trials identified by the systematic search. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies and the low quality of evidence, it remains difficult to draw firm conclusions. The efficacy of preventive probiotics should be studied in more detail in future trials. Application of probiotics for the prevention of VAP seems to be safe with only few side effects reported in the selected trials.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s40635-019-0238-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Dealing with the remaining controversies of probiotic safety

A clear safety profile of probiotics in clinical practice is essential in decision-making for all stakeholders and regulators. Probiotics have been investigated in different target populations, conditions and age groups. This also includes the use of probiotics in critically ill patients. Despite promising results reported with the use of probiotics and synbiotics, there is still a lively discussion regarding the proper and safe use of probiotics among physicians, researchers and regulators. This doubt and debate was sparked by the high incidence in mortality reported in a study with critically ill patients. Whereas no causal relationship has been established since, safety of probiotic has been questioned. In response, an overwhelming body of evidence suggesting that probiotics are safe has been compiled. Moreover, data indicates that probiotics reduce the number of adverse events compared to the control. However, due to a lack of standardised safety reporting in clinical studies, a strong evidence base on probiotic safety remains to be established. Here, we will discuss: (1) the rationale for using probiotics in the critically ill; (2) what happened during the Dutch Pancreatitis trial; (3) what are the known safety risks of probiotics based on the available data; and finally (4) how standardisation in safety reporting can drive probiotic innovation. Building a strong safety profile for probiotic strains will solidify its use in individuals that can benefit the most from microbial modulation.

Effectiveness of Multistrain Versus Single-strain Probiotics: Current Status and Recommendations for the Future

Probiotics are investigated as single-strain and multistrain products. In the market, however, there is an increasing tendency to work with multistrain probiotics, in particular, products with a high number of different strains. There are some thoughts behind this: more strains imply more chances of success; it can mean a broader spectrum of efficacy, and there is often the hope that there are at least additive and, potentially, even synergistic effects. The present review did not find convincing evidence that these assumptions are valid. There is, however, also no strong evidence that the assumptions are incorrect and/or that there is antagonistic activity between strains in a combination. We suggest that, to answer these questions, structured research is conducted. Starting with a systematic review of meta-analyses that have compared single-strain and multistrain probiotic efficacy, dedicated human studies need to be performed, comparing single-strain and multistrain probiotics to each other and placebo. In vitro and animal studies can provide indications and may help understand mechanisms. For human, animal, and in vitro studies, it is recommended to work with the simple setup of 2 single strains, a 2-strain combination, and placebo. It is also important in such research to take into consideration the doses, as a combination product will have a higher total dose.

Supplemented Use of Pre-, Pro-, and Synbiotics in Severe Acute Pancreatitis: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 13 Randomized Controlled Trials

Introduction: The role of pre-, pro-, and synbiotics supplemented to standard enteral nutrition in severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) remains unclear. We performed this updated meta-analysis to determine the value of pre-, pro- and synbiotics supplemented to standard enteral nutrition in predicted SAP.

Methods: A systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases was performed. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of pre-, pro-, and synbiotics supplemented to standard enteral nutrition with control regime in predicted SAP patients. Risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were used to express the estimates of dichotomous and continuous data respectively.

Results: 13 RCTs comprising an aggregate total of 950 patients were eventually enrolled. Pooled results suggested that supplemented use of pre-, pro- and synbiotics effectively shorten the length of hospital stay in Chinese SAP cohorts (6 RCTs, MD = −5.57, 95% CI = −8.21 to −2.93, P < 0.001); however significant differences with regard to remaining clinical outcomes were not detected for all patients. Further analysis based on category of interventions including pre-, pro- and synbiotics also confirmed the findings to be reliable.

Conclusions: Supplemented use of pre-, pro and synbiotics reduced the length of hospital stay in Chinese SAP cohorts. And thus, we concluded that pre-, pro- and synbiotics supplemented to standard enteral nutrition may be a potential option for the treatment of SAP patients. However, we also suggest designing further studies with large-scale and rigorous methods of addressing data to establish the effects and safety of supplemented use of pre-, pro- and synbiotics for SAP patients due to the presence of limitations.

The microbiome in mechanically ventilated patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Discovery of a normal lung microbiome requires reassessment of our concepts of HAP/VAP pathogenesis and has important implications for clinical diagnosis and management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Changes in the microbiome of dental plaque are associated with increased risk of HAP/VAP. A transition to a lung microbiome enriched with gut flora is found in ARDS with an increased inflammatory response in patients with this change in microbial flora. A characteristic microbiome pattern of higher amounts of bacterial DNA, lower community diversity, and greater relative abundance of a single species characterize pneumonia and occasionally identify bacteria not found in culture. The influence of the microbiome makes probiotics a logical strategy to prevent or ameliorate HAP/VAP but so far clinical support is unclear.

SUMMARY

The presence of a normal lung microbiome and the interaction of that microbiome with other microbiota have an important but previously overlooked impact on the pathogenesis of HAP/VAP. Deep sequencing suggests that the repertoire of microorganisms and the pattern of bacterial communities associated with HAP/VAP remains incompletely understood but recent studies are adding greater clarity.

Probiotics for Preventing Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Mechanically Ventilated Patients: A Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis

Background and Objective: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is still an important cause of morbidity and mortality in mechanically ventilated patients. The efficacy of the probiotics for preventing VAP is still controversial. Present study was conducted to comprehensively evaluate the effect of probiotics on VAP prevention in mechanically ventilated patients.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched up to September 2016. Eligible trials designed with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics with control in mechanically ventilated patients were included. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated with fixed or random effects models. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed using TSA 0.9beta software.

Results: Thirteen RCTs (N = 1969) were included. Overall, probiotics were associated with reduced incidence of VAP (RR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.60–0.89; P = 0.002), which was confirmed by TSA (TSA adjusted 95% CI = 0.55–0.96). However, no significant difference was observed in 90-day mortality (RR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.72–1.37; P = 0.99), overall mortality (RR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.70–1.02; P = 0.09), 28-day mortality (RR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.72–1.57; P = 0.99), intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.74–1.27; P = 0.82), hospital mortality (RR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.65–1.02; P = 0.07), diarrhea (RR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.83–1.19; P = 0.92), length of ICU stay (MD = −2.40 days, 95% CI = −6.75 to 1.95; P = 0.28), length of hospital stay (MD = −1.34 days, 95% CI = −6.21 to 3.54; P = 0.59), and duration of mechanical ventilation (MD = −3.32 days, 95% CI = −6.74 to 0.09; P = 0.06).

Conclusions: In this meta-analysis, we found that probiotics could reduce the incidence of VAP in mechanically ventilated patients. It seems likely that probiotics provide clinical benefits for mechanically ventilated patients.

Probiotics for Trauma Patients: Should We Be Taking a Precautionary Approach?

The use of probiotics in the hospital setting is largely understudied and highly controversial. Probiotics are living organisms that, when taken internally, can produce an immunomodulating effect and improve the gastrointestinal (GI) mucosal barrier. Although used for centuries by healthy individuals for GI health, their use in the hospital setting is now gaining wide attention for the prevention of infectious complications such as antibiotic-associated diarrhea, Clostridium difficile infections, multiple-organ dysfunction syndrome, and ventilator-associated pneumonia. However, current understanding of the efficacy of probiotics in the acute care setting is confounded by the inconsistencies in the literature with regard to the strain of probiotic being studied, optimal dosage, and timing and duration of dosing, which make the formulation of clinical practice guidelines difficult. Although the safety of probiotics has been confirmed when used for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases, practitioners remain hesitant to administer them to their patients, citing the lack of high-quality studies clearly demonstrating efficacy and safety. Infection is a cause of late death in trauma patients, but only recently has research been conducted on the use of probiotics specifically for the prevention of hospital-acquired infections in trauma patients. In the face of such limited but promising research, is it reasonable to use probiotics for the prevention of infection in hospitalized trauma patients and improve outcomes? Use of the "precautionary principle" may be useful in this instance.

Sporulated Bacillus as alternative treatment for diarrhea of hospitalized adult patients under enteral nutrition: A pilot randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Among hospitalized patients receiving enteral nutrition (EN), malnutrition and antibiotic use are some of the most common causes of diarrhea. Prebiotics and probiotics agents have been used for treatment of diarrhea in such patients. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of a sporulated Bacillus strain (Bacillus cereus A 05), compared to a control group using a prebiotic (soluble fiber), in reducing diarrhea in patients receiving EN and antibiotic therapy.

METHODS

Patients with diarrhea receiving EN were randomized to receive either B. cereus (study group) or soluble fiber (control group) for five days. The group treated with B. cereus received 4 vials with 5 mL × 10⁶ every 6 h. The control group treated with fiber received 10 g of soluble fiber every 8 h. Data assessed were serum albumin, nutrition status through Subjective Global Assessment (SGA), antibiotic use and osmolality (normal or hyperosmolar) of the tube feeding diets.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients were treated in each group. There was no significant difference between the groups regarding age, serum albumin, SGA score, dietary osmolality and antibiotic use. There was no significant difference between groups in ceasing diarrhea. However, the group treated with B. cereus took fewer days to cease diarrhea (2.5 ± 1.3 versus 3.7 ± 1.1 days, p = 0.011). Specifically, in the group treated with B. cereus A 05, malnourished patients did better than non-malnourished patients regarding diarrhea cessation (100% versus 25%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

B. cereus A 05 was more effective than fiber in reducing diarrhea among patients under EN and antibiotic therapy and was more effective among malnourished patients.

The function of probiotics on the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP): facts and gaps

Probiotics have been used for centuries in making fermented dairy products. The health benefits related to probiotics consumption are well recognized and they are generally regarded as safe (GRAS). Their therapeutic effects are due to the production of a variety of antimicrobial compounds, such as short-chain fatty acids, organic acids (such as lactic, acetic, formic, propionic and butyric acids), ethanol, hydrogen peroxide and bacteriocins. Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a nosocomial infection associated with high mortality in intensive care units. VAP can result from endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. These interventions increase the risk of infection as patients lose the natural barrier between the oropharynx and the trachea, which in turn facilitates the entry of pathogens through the aspiration of oropharyngeal secretions containing bacteria into the lung. In order to prevent this, probiotics have been used extensively against VAP. This review is an update containing information extracted from recent studies on the use of probiotics to treat VAP. In addition, probiotic safety, the therapeutic properties of probiotics, the probiotic strains used and the action of the probiotics mechanism are reviewed. Furthermore, the therapeutic effects of probiotic treatment procedures for VAP are compared to those of antibiotics. Finally, the influences of bacteriocin on the growth of human pathogens, and the side-effects and limitations of using probiotics for the treatment of VAP are addressed.

Preoperative Staphylococcus aureus Carriage and Risk of Surgical Site Infection After Cardiac Surgery in Children Younger than 1 year: A Pilot Cohort Study

Surgical site infections (SSI) increase length of stay, morbidity, mortality and cost of hospitalization. Staphylococcus aureus (SA) carriage is a known risk factor of SSI in adults, but its role in pediatrics remains uncertain. The main objective of this pilot prospective monocentric cohort study was to describe the prevalence of SA colonization in children under 1 year old before cardiac surgery. The secondary objectives were to compare the incidence of SSI and other nosocomial infections (NI) between preoperative carriers and non-carriers. From May 2012 to November 2013, all children <1 year old undergoing cardiac surgery under cardiopulmonary bypass underwent preoperative methicillin-resistant (MRSA) and methicillin-sensitive SA (MSSA) screening using real-time PCR. The only exclusion criterion was invalid PCR. All patients were followed up to 1 year after the surgery regarding SSI and other nosocomial infections. Among the 68 studied patients, SA colonization prevalence was 26.5%, comprising 23.5% MSSA and 2.9% MRSA. There was no significant difference between colonized and non-colonized children regarding SSI rate (16.7 vs 20%; p = 0.53), but ventilator-associated pneumonia rate was significantly higher among the SA carriers (22.2 vs 2%; p < 0.05). The colonization rate was different depending on the age of the patients (p < 0.05). This pilot study highlights that colonization with MSSA is frequent whereas MRSA prevalence is low in our population. In this cohort, there was no association between SA colonization and SSI incidence but further studies are needed to analyze this association.

An update on probiotics, prebiotics and symbiotics in clinical nutrition

The concept of prebiotics, probiotics, and symbiotics and their use in different situations of daily clinical practice related to clinical nutrition is reviewed, as well as their role in the treatment/prevention of diarrhea (acute, induced by antibiotics, secondary to radiotherapy), inflammatory bowel disease (ulcerative colitis and pouchitis), in colonic health (constipation, irritable bowel), in liver disease (steatosis and minimum encephalopathy), and in intensive care, surgical, and liver transplantation. While their effectiveness for preventing antibiotic-induced diarrhea and pouchitis in ulcerative colitis appears to be shown, additional studies are needed to establish recommendations in most clinical settings. The risk of infection associated to use of probiotics is relatively low; however, there are selected groups of patients in whom they should be used with caution (as jejunum infusion).

Probiotic and synbiotic therapy in critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Critical illness is characterized by a loss of commensal flora and an overgrowth of potentially pathogenic bacteria, leading to a high susceptibility to nosocomial infections. Probiotics are living non-pathogenic microorganisms, which may protect the gut barrier, attenuate pathogen overgrowth, decrease bacterial translocation and prevent infection. The purpose of this updated systematic review is to evaluate the overall efficacy of probiotics and synbiotic mixtures on clinical outcomes in critical illness.

Methods

Computerized databases from 1980 to 2016 were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating clinical outcomes associated with probiotic therapy as a single strategy or in combination with prebiotic fiber (synbiotics). Overall number of new infections was the primary outcome; secondary outcomes included mortality, ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), and diarrhea. Subgroup analyses were performed to elucidate the role of other key factors such as probiotic type and patient mortality risk on the effect of probiotics on outcomes.

Results

Thirty trials that enrolled 2972 patients were identified for analysis. Probiotics were associated with a significant reduction in infections (risk ratio 0.80, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.68, 0.95, P = 0.009; heterogeneity I² = 36 %, P = 0.09). Further, a significant reduction in the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) was found (risk ratio 0.74, 95 % CI 0.61, 0. 90, P = 0.002; I² = 19 %). No effect on mortality, LOS or diarrhea was observed. Subgroup analysis indicated that the greatest improvement in the outcome of infections was in critically ill patients receiving probiotics alone versus synbiotic mixtures, although limited synbiotic trial data currently exists.

Conclusion

Probiotics show promise in reducing infections, including VAP in critical illness. Currently, clinical heterogeneity and potential publication bias reduce strong clinical recommendations and indicate further high quality clinical trials are needed to conclusively prove these benefits.

Probiotic pre-administration reduces mortality in a mouse model of cecal ligation and puncture-induced sepsis

A number of clinical trials have demonstrated that the use of probiotics has the potential to prevent nosocomial infections. However, the mechanism underlying probiotic-induced anti-infection and sepsis remains to be investigated. In the present study, 200 µl/day of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) or normal saline (control) was orally administrated to 4-week-old C57BL6 mice 4 weeks prior to cecal ligation and puncture (CLP). A number of mice were sacrificed 24 h after CLP, and the remaining mice were used for survival studies. Ileum tissues were collected to evaluate the injury on the intestine. Blood samples were also obtained to investigate the changed metabolic pattern in mice that underwent different treatments using ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled with quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UPLC-QTOF-MS). In the survival studies, the mortality of CLP-induced septic mice pretreated with LGG was significantly lower compared with untreated mice (P=0.029). Ileum mucosal damage was evident in the control septic mice. Based on the data of UPLC-QTOF-MS, phosphatidylcholines were increased and lysophosphatidylcholines (LPCs) that contained polyunsaturated fatty acids were decreased in septic mice, whereas saturated fatty acid LPCs reveal no significant difference between septic and sham mice. In addition, the metabolic profile in the septic mice pretreated with LGG was much closer to that of sham mice compared with control septic mice. The results of the present study suggest that probiotic pre-administration reduces the mortality in septic mice by decreasing ileum mucosal damage, increasing the gut barrier integrity and altering global serum metabolic profiles.