Dataset Information

Probiotics for preventing ventilator-associated pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is considered to be a worldwide issue along with the development of supportive ventilation. The preventing strategy is of great importance for its poor prognostic and difficulties in treatment. Probiotics have been advocated as one of the possible preventive measures. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the potential benefits of probiotics.

Methods

The databases, Web of science, PubMed, Ovid and Cochrane lib were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) publications that compared the effectiveness of probiotics with placebo in the prevention of VAP. The incidence of VAP was considered as the primary endpoint, mortality, length of stay in intensive care units (ICUs), etiology of the infections were considered as secondary endpoints.

Results

A total of 844 patients from 5 trials were subjected to meta-analysis. Probiotics did not significantly decrease the incidence of VAP (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.85-1.04, p=0.22), however, the administration of probiotics reduced the risk of VAP caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) (RR 0.30, 95%CI 0.11-0.91, P=0.03). It failed to affect any other endpoints.

Conclusion

Probiotic prophylaxis of ventilator-associated pneumonia remained inconclusive and it failed to improve the prognosis of general mechanically ventilated patients. It was noteworthy that infections caused by P. aeruginosa was reduced by administration of probiotics. In further, it is recommended that advanced studies should exploit transformation in pathogenic microorganisms owing to administration of probiotics as well as the specific population.

SUBMITTER: Wang J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3867481 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundFor ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), the safety of short-course versus long-course antibiotic therapy is still debated, especially regarding documented VAP due to non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli (NF-GNB). The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the rates of recurrence and relapse of VAP in patients receiving short-course (≤8 days) and long-course (≥10-15 days) of antibiotic therapy.MethodsThe protocol for this study was registered in the PROSPERO database (ID: CRD42022365138). We performed an electronic search of the relevant literature and limited our search to data published from 2000 until September 1, 2022. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the United States National Library of Medicine, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Embase, National Institutes of Health PubMed/MEDLINE, web of science and Google Scholar databases. The primary endpoint was the recurrence and relapses of VAP, secondary endpoints were 28-day mortality, mechanical ventilation duration, number of extra-pulmonary infections and length of ICU stay.FindingsWe identified five relevant studies involving 1069 patients (530 patients in the short-course group and 539 patients in the long-course group). The meta-analysis did not reveal any significant difference between short and long-course antibiotic therapy for recurrence and relapses of VAP (odd ratio "OR" = 1.48, 95% confidence intervals (CI) [0.96, 2.28], p = 0.08 and OR = 1.45, 95% CI [0.94, 2.22], p = 0.09, respectively), including those due to NF-GNB (OR = 1.90, 95% CI [0.93, 3.33], p = 0.05 and OR = 1.76, 95% CI [0.93, 3.33], p = 0.08, respectively). No difference was found for 28 days-mortality (OR = 1.24, 95% CI [0.92, 1.67], p = 0.16), mechanical ventilation duration, number of extra-pulmonary infections and length of ICU stay. However, short-course therapy significantly increased the number of antibiotic-free days.InterpretationOur meta-analysis showed that short-course antibiotic therapy did not result in increased number of recurence and relapses of VAP, suggesting that short-course should be preferred to reduce the exposure to antibiotics.FundingNone.

Project description:Respiratory tract infections (RTIs) represent one of the main health problems in children. Probiotics are viable bacteria that colonize the intestine and affect the host intestinal microbial balance. Accumulating evidence suggests that probiotic consumption may decrease the incidence of or modify RTIs. The authors systematically reviewed data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate the effect of probiotic consumption on RTIs in children.MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically searched for RCTs regarding the effect of probiotics on RTIs in children. The outcomes included number of children experienced with at least 1 RTI episode, duration of illness episodes, days of illness per subject, and school/day care absenteeism due to infection. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled relative risks, or mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).A total of 23 trials involving 6269 children were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. None of the trials showed a high risk of bias. The quality of the evidence of outcomes was moderate. The age range of subjects was from newborn to 18 years. The results of meta-analysis showed that probiotic consumption significantly decreased the number of subjects having at least 1 RTI episode (17 RCTs, 4513 children, relative risk 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.96, P?=?0.004). Children supplemented with probiotics had fewer numbers of days of RTIs per person compared with children who had taken a placebo (6 RCTs, 2067 children, MD -0.16, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.02, P?=?0.03), and had fewer numbers of days absent from day care/school (8 RCTs, 1499 children, MD -0.94, 95% CI -1.72 to -0.15, P?=?0.02). However, there was no statistically significant difference of illness episode duration between probiotic intervention group and placebo group (9 RCTs, 2817 children, MD -0.60, 95% CI -1.49 to 0.30, P?=?0.19).Based on the available data and taking into account the safety profile of RCTs, probiotic consumption appears to be a feasible way to decrease the incidence of RTIs in children.

Project description:BackgroundVentilator-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.MethodsRandomized 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.ResultsA 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).ConclusionProbiotic 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].

Project description:We aimed to provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of probiotics supplementation on symptoms and disease activity in patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases (rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondylarthritis (SpA), or psoriatic arthritis). A systematic literature review and meta-analysis from RA and SpA randomized controlled trials were conducted searching for articles in MEDLINE/PubMed and abstracts from recent international rheumatology meetings. The control group was a placebo or another dietary intervention. The risk of bias of the selected studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration tool and the Jadad scale. The initial search yielded 173 articles. Of these, 13 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, 8 concerning a total of 344 RA patients and 2 concerning a total of 197 SpA patients. Three meta-analyses were also analyzed. Probiotic strains and quantities used were different among trials (5 studies using Lactobacillus sp., 1 trial Bacillus coagulans and the others a mix of different probiotic strains). Time to assess response ranged from 8 weeks to one year. Two studies associated probiotic supplementation with a dietary intervention. Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant decrease of C-reactive protein (CRP) concentration (mean difference (MD)) -3.04 (95% CI -4.47, -1.62) mg/L, p < 0.001; I2 = 20%, n patients = 209) with probiotics in RA. However, after excluding high-risk-of-bias trials of meta-analysis, there was no difference between probiotics and placebo on DAS28 (standard MD -0.54; 95% CI -1.94 to 0.85, p = 0.45, I2 93%, n patients = 143). The two studies on SpA patients showed no efficacy of probiotics. Probiotic supplementation might decrease RA activity with a moderate decrease effect on CRP, but lack of evidence and studies' heterogeneity do not allow us to propose them to patients with inflammatory arthritis to control their disease. Further RCTs are required in the future to determinate the efficacy of probiotics and the optimal administration design.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP/VAP) are often selected for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) aiming at new drug approval. Guidelines for the design of such RCTs have been repeatedly updated by regulatory agencies. We hypothesized that large variability in the enrolled populations, the endpoints assessed and the HAP/VAP definition criteria may impact the results of these studies, and addressed this through a systematic review of HAP/VAP RCTs. METHODS:A search (Pubmed-Embase-ICAAC-ECCMID) of all RCTs published between 1994 and 2016 comparing antimicrobial treatment for HAP/VAP in the intensive care unit was conducted. The populations enrolled, inclusion/exclusion criteria, statistical design and endpoints assessed were recorded. All unpublished RCTs recorded on the ClinicalTrials.gov registry were also screened. RESULTS:From the 93 abstracts reviewed, 39 potentially relevant studies were inspected, leading to 27 studies being included. As expected, illness severity or the proportion with VAP (27-100%) differed greatly among the enrolled populations. The HAP/VAP definition used various clinical and biological criteria, and only 55% of studies required a microbiological sample. The mandatory duration of prior hospital stay was variable; the mechanical ventilation duration was an inclusion criterion in only 41% of VAP studies. Nine studies had non-inferiority design, but nine studies (33%) did not have a pre-specified statistical hypothesis. Clinical cure was the primary endpoint in 24 studies, but was recorded in several populations or as the co-primary endpoint in 13 studies. The definition of clinical cure and the timing of its assessment greatly differed. This variability slightly improved over time but remained significant in the 13 registered but currently unpublished RCTs that we screened. CONCLUSION:Our study provides a description of populations and endpoints of RCTs evaluating antimicrobials for treatment of HAP/VAP in the ICU. There was significant heterogeneity in enrollment criteria, endpoints and statistical design, which may influence the ability of studies to demonstrate differences between studied drugs.