The PAV trial: does lactobacillus prevent post-antibiotic vulvovaginal candidiasis? Protocol of a randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN24141277]

Efficacy of Direct or Indirect Use of Probiotics for the Improvement of Maternal Depression during Pregnancy and in the Postnatal Period: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The mother and infant form a unique bond, with maternal mental health affecting the interactions with the infant and infant behaviours impacting maternal mental health. One of the possible mechanisms influencing maternal mental health is the manipulation of the gut-brain axis by consuming probiotic supplements. Probiotics can also have an indirect influence on maternal mental health via the modulation of the infant microbiome and consequently improving the infant’s health and thus, indirectly leading to an improvement in maternal mood. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy of probiotics on maternal mental health by searching for randomised controlled trials via international databases: Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science until January 2022. A meta-analysis was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration methodology where possible. We found seven clinical trials that included the word probiotics and addressed maternal depression and/or anxiety. Of these, five trials investigated the influence of maternal probiotic supplementation on the gut-brain axis. Two trials investigated the indirect influence of probiotics on maternal depression via supplementation of probiotics by infants and subsequent influence on the crying of colicky infants. Meta-analysis of two studies of pregnant and postnatal women and two studies of infants consuming probiotics on the outcome of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale for mothers showed no statistical difference. The findings indicate that maternal depression is very complex and is influenced by various bidirectional factors. One of the factors that can improve maternal mental health is probiotics, however, careful consideration must be given to correct strain selection as strain-specific effectiveness was observed. Further well-designed, robust clinical studies are warranted.

Probiotics for the prevention of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics can disturb gastrointestinal microbiota which may lead to reduced resistance to pathogens such as Clostridium difficile (C. difficile). Probiotics are live microbial preparations that, when administered in adequate amounts, may confer a health benefit to the host, and are a potential C. difficile prevention strategy. Recent clinical practice guidelines do not recommend probiotic prophylaxis, even though probiotics have the highest quality evidence among cited prophylactic therapies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of probiotics for preventing C.difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) in adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Register from inception to 21 March 2017. Additionally, we conducted an extensive grey literature search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled (placebo, alternative prophylaxis, or no treatment control) trials investigating probiotics (any strain, any dose) for prevention of CDAD, or C. difficile infection were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors (independently and in duplicate) extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcome was the incidence of CDAD. Secondary outcomes included detection of C. difficile infection in stool, adverse events, antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) and length of hospital stay. Dichotomous outcomes (e.g. incidence of CDAD) were pooled using a random-effects model to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). We calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) where appropriate. Continuous outcomes (e.g. length of hospital stay) were pooled using a random-effects model to calculate the mean difference and corresponding 95% CI. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of missing data on efficacy and safety outcomes. For the sensitivity analyses, we assumed that the event rate for those participants in the control group who had missing data was the same as the event rate for those participants in the control group who were successfully followed. For the probiotic group, we calculated effects using the following assumed ratios of event rates in those with missing data in comparison to those successfully followed: 1.5:1, 2:1, 3:1, and 5:1. To explore possible explanations for heterogeneity, a priori subgroup analyses were conducted on probiotic species, dose, adult versus pediatric population, and risk of bias as well as a post hoc subgroup analysis on baseline risk of CDAD (low 0% to 2%; moderate 3% to 5%; high > 5%). The overall quality of the evidence supporting each outcome was independently assessed using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies (9955 participants) met the eligibility requirements for our review. Overall, 27 studies were rated as either high or unclear risk of bias. A complete case analysis (i.e. participants who completed the study) among trials investigating CDAD (31 trials, 8672 participants) suggests that probiotics reduce the risk of CDAD by 60%. The incidence of CDAD was 1.5% (70/4525) in the probiotic group compared to 4.0% (164/4147) in the placebo or no treatment control group (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.52; GRADE = moderate). Twenty-two of 31 trials had missing CDAD data ranging from 2% to 45%. Our complete case CDAD results proved robust to sensitivity analyses of plausible and worst-plausible assumptions regarding missing outcome data and results were similar whether considering subgroups of trials in adults versus children, inpatients versus outpatients, different probiotic species, lower versus higher doses of probiotics, or studies at high versus low risk of bias. However, in a post hoc analysis, we did observe a subgroup effect with respect to baseline risk of developing CDAD. Trials with a baseline CDAD risk of 0% to 2% and 3% to 5% did not show any difference in risk but trials enrolling participants with a baseline risk of > 5% for developing CDAD demonstrated a large 70% risk reduction (interaction P value = 0.01). Among studies with a baseline risk > 5%, the incidence of CDAD in the probiotic group was 3.1% (43/1370) compared to 11.6% (126/1084) in the control group (13 trials, 2454 participants; RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.42; GRADE = moderate). With respect to detection of C. difficile in the stool pooled complete case results from 15 trials (1214 participants) did not show a reduction in infection rates. C. difficile infection was 15.5% (98/633) in the probiotics group compared to 17.0% (99/581) in the placebo or no treatment control group (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.10; GRADE = moderate). Adverse events were assessed in 32 studies (8305 participants) and our pooled complete case analysis indicates probiotics reduce the risk of adverse events by 17% (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.97; GRADE = very low). In both treatment and control groups the most common adverse events included abdominal cramping, nausea, fever, soft stools, flatulence, and taste disturbance.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on this systematic review and meta-analysis of 31 randomized controlled trials including 8672 patients, moderate certainty evidence suggests that probiotics are effective for preventing CDAD (NNTB = 42 patients, 95% CI 32 to 58). Our post hoc subgroup analyses to explore heterogeneity indicated that probiotics are effective among trials with a CDAD baseline risk >5% (NNTB = 12; moderate certainty evidence), but not among trials with a baseline risk ≤5% (low to moderate certainty evidence). Although adverse effects were reported among 32 included trials, there were more adverse events among patients in the control groups. The short-term use of probiotics appears to be safe and effective when used along with antibiotics in patients who are not immunocompromised or severely debilitated. Despite the need for further research, hospitalized patients, particularly those at high risk of CDAD, should be informed of the potential benefits and harms of probiotics.

Recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis

Recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis (RVVC) is a common cause of significant morbidity in women in all strata of society affecting millions of women worldwide. Previously, RVVC occurrence was limited by onset of menopause but the widespread use of hormone replacement therapy has extended the at-risk period. Candida albicans remains the dominant species responsible for RVVC, however optimal management of RVVC requires species determination and effective treatment measures are best if species-specific. Considerable progress has been made in understanding risk factors that determine susceptibility to RVVC, particularly genetic factors, as well as new insights into normal vaginal defense immune mechanisms and their aberrations in RVVC. While effective control of RVVC is achievable with the use of fluconazole maintenance suppressive therapy, cure of RVVC remains elusive especially in this era of fluconazole drug resistance. Vaccine development remains a critical challenge and need.

Probiotics for the prevention of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Antibiotics are widely prescribed; however they can cause disturbances in gastrointestinal flora which may lead to reduced resistance to pathogens such as Clostridium difficile (C. difficile). Probiotics are live organisms thought to balance the gastrointestinal flora.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objectives were to assess the efficacy and safety of probiotics for preventing Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) or C. difficile infection in adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

On February 21, 2013 we searched PubMed (1966-2013), EMBASE (1966-2013), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 1), CINAHL (1982-2013), AMED (1985-2013), and ISI Web of Science. Additionally, we conducted an extensive grey literature search including contact with industry representatives.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled (placebo, alternative prophylaxis, or no treatment control) trials investigating probiotics (any strain, any dose) for prevention of CDAD, or C. difficile infection were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently and in duplicate extracted data and assessed risk of bias using pre-constructed, and piloted, data extraction forms. Any disagreements were resolved by a third adjudicator. For articles published in abstract form only, further information was sought by contacting principal authors. The primary outcome was the incidence of CDAD. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of C. difficile infection, adverse events, antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) and length of hospital stay. Dichotomous outcomes (e.g. incidence of CDAD) were pooled using a random-effects model to calculate the relative risk and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Continuous outcomes (e.g. length of hospital) were pooled using a random-effects model to calculate the mean difference and corresponding 95% CI. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of missing data on efficacy and safety outcomes. For the sensitivity analyses, we assumed that the event rate for those participants in the control group who had missing data was the same as the event rate for those participants in the control group who were successfully followed. For the probiotic group we calculated effects using the following assumed ratios of event rates in those with missing data in comparison to those successfully followed: 1.5:1, 2:1, 3:1, and 5:1. To explore possible explanations for heterogeneity, a priori subgroup analysis were conducted on probiotic species, dose, adult versus pediatric population, and risk of bias.The overall quality of the evidence supporting each outcome was assessed using the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 1871 studies were identified with 31 (4492 participants) meeting eligibility requirements for our review. Overall 11 studies were rated as a high risk of bias due mostly to missing outcome data. A complete case analysis (i.e. participants who completed the study) of those trials investigating CDAD (23 trials, 4213 participants) suggests that probiotics significantly reduce this risk by 64%. The incidence of CDAD was 2.0% in the probiotic group compared to 5.5% in the placebo or no treatment control group (RR 0.36; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.51). Sixteen of 23 trials had missing CDAD data ranging from 5% to 45%. These results proved robust to sensitivity analyses of plausible and worst-plausible assumptions regarding missing outcome data and were similar whether considering trials in adults versus children, lower versus higher doses, different probiotic species, or higher versus lower risk of bias. Our judgment is that the overall evidence warrants moderate confidence in this large relative risk reduction. We downgraded the overall quality of evidence for CDAD to 'moderate' due to imprecision. There were few events (154) and the calculated optimal information size (n = 8218) was more than the total sample size. With respect to the incidence of C. difficile infection, a secondary outcome, pooled complete case results from 13 trials (961 participants) did not show a statistically significant reduction. The incidence of C. difficile infection was 12.6% in the probiotics group compared to 12.7% in the placebo or no treatment control group (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.24). Adverse events were assessed in 26 studies (3964 participants) and our pooled complete case analysis indicates probiotics reduce the risk of adverse events by 20% (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95). In both treatment and control groups the most common adverse events included abdominal cramping, nausea, fever, soft stools, flatulence, and taste disturbance. For the short-term use of probiotics in patients that are not immunocompromised or severely debilitated, we consider the strength of this evidence to be moderate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on this systematic review and meta-analysis of 23 randomized controlled trials including 4213 patients, moderate quality evidence suggests that probiotics are both safe and effective for preventing Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea.

Cigarette smoking, knowledge, attitude and prediction of smoking between male students, teachers and clergymen in tehran, iran, 2009

BACKGROUND

Students, clergymen and teachers as role models can be very important in encouragement or prevention of cigarette smoking in young people. The aim of this study was to compare prevalence of smoking in 3 male groups of teachers, clergymen and university students. Also, study their knowledge and attitude towards it and the prediction of their future consumption.

METHODS

In a cross sectional study in 2009 in Tehran, Iran, 1,271 male students, 549 clergymen and 551 teachers were randomly enrolled. Each participant completed the global adult tobacco survey questionnaire. Knowledge, attitude and prediction of smoking for the next 5 years were questioned in these 3 groups. Chi-squared test and logistic regression were used for analysis. P < 0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Prevalence of cigarette smoking was 31.1%, 21.9% and 27.2% among students, clergymen and teachers, respectively. Smoking in students was not associated with poor knowledge but were in teachers and clergymen. The odds ratio of smoking in students, clergymen and teachers was higher among those with having inappropriate attitude towards it (OR = 1.6, 6.1 and 4.5). Those with poor knowledge had an inappropriate attitude and predicted higher chance of cigarette consumption in the next 5 years (P < 0.0001). Inappropriate attitude in all 3 groups resulted in higher prediction of future smoking (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that the prevalence of smoking among male students and teachers was higher than general population and clergymen who equally smoked. Also, level of knowledge and attitude of students were lower than teachers and clergymen.

Probiotics in clinical practice: an overview

The observation that intestinal bacterial microflora might be able to influence immune system surveillance through changed nutritional habits has raised awareness of the role of probiotics. These are live microorganisms that are able to reach the gastrointestinal tract and alter its microfloral composition, producing beneficial health effects when consumed in adequate amounts. Recent clinical trials have evaluated the clinical effectiveness of probiotics in the treatment and prevention of a wide range of acute and chronic gastrointestinal diseases, and also non-gastrointestinal diseases, such as atopy, respiratory infections, vaginitis and hypercholesterolaemia. Probiotic supplements are generally regarded as safe because the microorganisms they contain are identical to those found in human gastrointestinal and vaginal microflora. Guidelines on the use of probiotics in the clinical setting require periodical updates for the latest data to be included in clinical applications. The purpose of this clinical report is to review current evidence on the use of probiotics in a variety of gastrointestinal and non-gastrointestinal conditions.

Genital Candida species detected in samples from women in Melbourne, Australia, before and after treatment with antibiotics

Vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) remains a common cause of morbidity, with three-quarters of women affected during their lifetimes. Use of antibiotics is an acknowledged trigger for VVC, which adversely affects women's physical and emotional health. Knowledge of patterns of genital Candida species-level identification is important for management, as Candida species other than Candida albicans often fail first-line treatment. A community sample of women with no vaginal symptoms, and who were prescribed antibiotics, was recruited into this study, where the incidence of genital colonization by various Candida species was documented, as well as symptoms of VVC plus relevant associations, before and after treatment with antibiotics. Self-collected low vaginal swabs were taken prior to and 8 days after completion of antibiotic treatment, and data on various potential risk factors for VVC were collected simultaneously, with complete data being available for 233 participants. Baseline Candida species colonization was present in 21% of women (95% confidence intervals [CI], 17% to 27%), rising to 37% (95% CI, 31% to 44%) after antibiotic treatment. The primary species detected for either period was C. albicans (73%), with Candida glabrata detected in around 20%. Self-assessed proneness to VVC after antibiotic treatment and baseline colonization with Candida spp. were significantly associated with symptomatic VVC after antibiotic treatment. For microbiologically proven candidiasis, VVC symptoms had a sensitivity of 57% and a specificity of 91%. When physicians prescribe antibiotics, the history of risk of VVC is one issue that physicians should discuss with women, particularly those who are self-identified as being prone to VVC. Furthermore, we recommend that definitive microbiological diagnoses be made for women with recurrent symptoms or those failing initial treatment, to guide appropriate therapy.

Effect of lactobacillus in preventing post-antibiotic vulvovaginal candidiasis: a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To test whether oral or vaginal lactobacillus can prevent vulvovaginitis after antibiotic treatment.

DESIGN

Randomised, placebo controlled, double blind, factorial 2x2 trial.

SETTING

Fifty general practices and 16 pharmacies in Melbourne, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Non-pregnant women aged 18-50 years who required a short course of oral antibiotics for a non-gynaecological infection: 278 were enrolled in the study, and results were available for 235.

INTERVENTIONS

Lactobacillus preparations taken orally or vaginally, or both, from enrollment until four days after completion of their antibiotic course.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Participants' reports of symptoms of post-antibiotic vulvovaginitis, with microbiological evidence of candidiasis provided by a self obtained vaginal swab.

RESULTS

Overall, 55/235 (23% (95% confidence interval 18% to 29%)) women developed post-antibiotic vulvovaginitis. Compared with placebo, the odds ratio for developing post-antibiotic vulvovaginitis with oral lactobacillus was 1.06 (95% confidence interval 0.58 to 1.94) and with vaginal lactobacillus 1.38 (0.75 to 2.54). Compliance with antibiotics and interventions was high. The trial was terminated after the second interim analysis because of lack of effect of the interventions. Given the data at this time, the chances of detecting a significant reduction in vulvovaginitis with oral or vaginal lactobacillus treatment were less than 0.032 and 0.0006 respectively if the trial proceeded to full enrollment.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of oral or vaginal forms of lactobacillus to prevent post-antibiotic vulvovaginitis is not supported by these results. Further research on this subject is unlikely to be fruitful, unless new understandings about the pathogenesis of post-antibiotic vulvovaginitis indicate a possible role for lactobacillus.