首页> 外文期刊>Evidence-Based Child Health: A Cochrane Review Journal >Cochrane review: Probiotics for the prevention of pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea
【24h】

Cochrane review: Probiotics for the prevention of pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea

机译:科克伦评论:益生菌预防小儿抗生素相关性腹泻

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Background nAntibiotics alter the microbial balance within the gastrointestinal tract. Probiotics may prevent antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) via restoration of the gut microflora. Antibiotics are prescribed frequently in children and AAD is common in this population. nnObjectives nTo assess the efficacy and adverse effects of probiotics (any specified strain or dose) for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea in children. nTo assess adverse events associated with the use of probiotics when co-administered with antibiotics in children. nnSearch strategy nMEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL , AMED, and the Web of Science (inception to August 2006) were searched along with specialized registers including the Cochrane IBD/FBD Review Group, CISCOM, Chalmers PedCAM Research Register and trial registries from inception to 2005. Letters were sent to authors of included trials, nutra/pharmaceutical companies, and experts in the field requesting additional information on ongoing or unpublished trials. Conference proceedings, dissertation abstracts, and reference lists from included and relevant articles were hand searched. nnSelection criteria nRandomized, parallel, controlled (placebo, active, or no treatment) trials comparing co-administered probiotics with antibiotics for the prevention of diarrhea secondary to antibiotic use in children (0 to 18 years). nnData collection and analysis nMethodological quality assessment and data extraction were conducted independently by two authors (BCJ, AS). Dichotomous data (incidence of diarrhea, adverse events) were combined using pooled relative risks, and continuous data (mean duration of diarrhea, mean daily stool frequency) as weighted mean differences, along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Adverse events were summarized using risk difference. For overall pooled results on the incidence of diarrhea, a priori sensitivity analyses included per protocol versus intention to treat, random versus fixed effects, and methodological quality criterion. Subgroup analysis were conducted on probiotic strain, dose, definition of antibiotic-associated diarrhea, and antibiotic agent. nnMain results nTen studies met the inclusion criteria. Trials included treatment with either Lactobacilli spp., Bifidobacterium spp., Streptococcus spp., or Saccharomyces boulardii alone or in combination. Six studies used a single strain probiotic agent and four combined two probiotic strains. nThe per protocol analysis for 9/10 trials reporting on the incidence of diarrhea show statistically significant results favouring probiotics over activeon active controls (RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.74). However, intention to treat analysis showed non-significant results overall (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.50 to 1.63). Five of ten trials monitored for adverse events (n = 647); none reported a serious adverse event. nnAuthors' conclusions nProbiotics show promise for the prevention of pediatric AAD. While per protocol analysis yields treatment effect estimates that are both statistically and clinically significant, as does analysis of high quality studies, the estimate from the intention to treat analysis was not statistically significant. Future studies should involve probiotic strains and doses with the most promising evidence (e.g., Lactobacillus GG, Lactobacillus sporogenes, Saccharomyces boulardii at 5 to 40 billion colony forming units/day). Research done to date does not permit determination of the effect of age (e.g., infant versus older children) or antibiotic duration (e.g., 5 days versus 10 days). Future trials would benefit from a validated primary outcome measure for antibiotic-associated diarrhea that is sensitive to change and reflects what treatment effect clinicians, parents, and children consider important. The current data are promising, but it is premature to routinely recommend probiotics for the prevention of pediatric AAD. nnPlain language summary nIt is premature to routinely recommend probiotics for the prevention of pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) nStudies of probiotics for the prevention of pediatric AAD. Ten studies were reviewed and provide the best evidence we have. Study quality was mostly good overall. The studies tested 1986 children (aged 0 to 18 years) who were receiving probiotics co-administered with antibiotics to prevent AAD. The subjects received probiotics (Lactobacilli spp., Bifidobacterium spp., Streptococcus spp., or Saccharomyces boulardii alone or in combination), placebo (fake pills), other treatments thought to prevent AAD (i.e. diosmectite or infant formula) or no treatment. The studies were short term and ranged in length from 15 days to 3 months. nWhat is AAD and could probiotics work to prevent AAD? AAD occurs when antibiotics disturb the natural balance of "good" and "bad" bacteria in the intestinal tract causing harmful bacteria to sometimes multiply beyond their normal numbers. The symptoms of AAD may include frequent watery bowel movements and crampy abdominal pain. Probiotics are dietary supplements containing potentially beneficial bacteria or yeast. Probiotics are thought to restore the natural balance of bacteria in the intestinal tract. nWhat did the studies show? An analysis that included only patients who completed the studies showed that probiotics may be effective for preventing AAD. However, a more conservative analysis that counted study drop-outs as treatment failures did not show any differences between probiotic and comparison groups. nHow safe are probiotics? Probiotics were generally well tolerated and side effects occurred infrequently. nWhat is the bottom line? Although current data are promising, there is insufficient evidence to routinely recommend the use of probiotics for the prevention of pediatric AAD.
机译:背景n抗生素会改变胃肠道内的微生物平衡。益生菌可以通过肠道菌群的恢复来预防与抗生素相关的腹泻(AAD)。儿童经常开抗生素处方,在这一人群中常见AAD。 nn目的n评估益生菌(任何指定的菌株或剂量)预防儿童与抗生素相关的腹泻的功效和不良反应。 n要评估与儿童共同使用抗生素时与使用益生菌有关的不良事件。 nn搜索策略nMEDLINE,EMBASE,CENTRAL,CINAHL,AMED和Web of Science(成立至2006年8月)以及包括Cochrane IBD / FBD审查小组,CISCOM,Chalmers PedCAM研究注册簿和试验注册簿在内的专门注册簿进行了搜索。 2005年。致函包括试验的作者,nutra /制药公司和该领域的专家,要求提供有关正在进行或未发表试验的更多信息。人工搜索会议录,论文摘要以及包括和相关文章中的参考文献清单。 nn选择标准n随机对照,平行,对照(安慰剂,有效或不治疗)试验比较了益生菌与抗生素共同使用预防儿童(0至18岁)继发腹泻的情况。 nn数据收集和分析n方法学质量评估和数据提取由两位作者(BCJ,AS)独立进行。将二分数据(腹泻发生率,不良事件)使用合并的相对风险合并,并将连续数据(腹泻平均持续时间,平均每日大便频率)作为加权平均差异及其相应的95%置信区间进行合并。使用风险差异总结不良事件。对于腹泻发生率的总体汇总结果,先验敏感性分析包括每个方案与治疗意图,随机效应与固定效应以及方法学质量标准。对益生菌菌株,剂量,抗生素相关性腹泻的定义和抗生素药物进行亚组分析。 nn主要结果n十项研究符合纳入标准。试验包括单独或组合用乳酸杆菌属,双歧杆菌属,链球菌属或布拉氏酵母处理。六项研究使用了单一菌株的益生菌制剂,而四项联合使用了两种益生菌菌株。 n 9/10个试验的每项方案分析报告了腹泻的发生率,显示统计学上显着的结果表明,益生菌优于活性/非活性对照(RR 0.49; 95%CI 0.32至0.74)。但是,治疗意向分析显示总体结果不显着(RR 0.90; 95%CI 0.50至1.63)。监测十项试验中的五项不良事件(n = 647);没有人报告严重不良事件。 nn作者的结论n益生菌显示出预防小儿AAD的希望。虽然按方案分析得出的治疗效果估算值在统计学和临床​​上均具有统计学意义,但高质量研究的分析也是如此,但从治疗分析意图得出的估算值在统计学上并不显着。未来的研究应该涉及具有最有前途证据的益生菌菌株和剂量(例如每天5至400亿个菌落形成单位的GG乳杆菌,孢子乳杆菌,布拉氏酵母)。迄今为止进行的研究尚不能确定年龄(例如婴儿与大龄儿童)或抗生素持续时间(例如5天对10天)的影响。未来的试验将受益于抗生素相关性腹泻的有效主要结果指标,该指标对变化敏感,并反映出临床医生,父母和孩子认为重要的治疗效果。目前的数据是有希望的,但常规推荐益生菌预防小儿AAD为时过早。 nn普通语言摘要n常规推荐益生菌预防小儿抗生素相关性腹泻(AAD)为时尚早,n预防小儿AAD益生菌的研究为时过早。对十项研究进行了审查,并提供了我们拥有的最佳证据。总体而言,学习质量总体良好。这项研究测试了1986年接受益生菌与抗生素共同预防AAD的儿童(0至18岁)。受试者接受益生菌(乳酸杆菌属,双歧杆菌属,链球菌属或博拉氏酵母菌单独或组合使用),安慰剂(假药),其他认为可以预防AAD的治疗方法(即透硅藻土或婴儿配方奶粉)或不进行任何治疗。这项研究是短期的,长度从15天到3个月不等。 n什么是AAD,益生菌可以预防AAD吗?当抗生素扰乱肠道中“好”和“坏”细菌的自然平衡导致有害细菌有时繁殖超过其正常数量时,就会发生AAD。 AAD的症状可能包括频繁的水样肠蠕动和腹部绞痛。益生菌是含有潜在有益细菌或酵母的膳食补充剂。益生菌被认为可以恢复肠道细菌的自然平衡。研究表明了什么?仅包括完成研究的患者的分析表明,益生菌可能有效预防AAD。但是,一项更保守的分析将研究失败归因于治疗失败,这一分析并未显示益生菌和对照组之间的差异。 n益生菌的安全性如何?益生菌通常具有良好的耐受性,并且很少发生副作用。 n底线是什么?尽管目前的数据是有希望的,但是没有足够的证据常规推荐使用益生菌来预防小儿AAD。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号