Efficacy of probiotics regimens for Helicobacter pylori eradication: A systematic review, pairwise, and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Mohammad Tanashat, Mohamed Abuelazm, Mohamed Abouzid, Yazan A Al-Ajlouni, Alaa Ramadan, Sumaya Alsalah, Abdulrahman Sharaf, Dina Ayman, Hesham Elharti, Sara Zhana, Obieda Altobaishat, Basel Abdelazeem, Fouad Jaber
{"title":"Efficacy of probiotics regimens for Helicobacter pylori eradication: A systematic review, pairwise, and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Mohammad Tanashat, Mohamed Abuelazm, Mohamed Abouzid, Yazan A Al-Ajlouni, Alaa Ramadan, Sumaya Alsalah, Abdulrahman Sharaf, Dina Ayman, Hesham Elharti, Sara Zhana, Obieda Altobaishat, Basel Abdelazeem, Fouad Jaber","doi":"10.1016/j.clnesp.2024.11.016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection increases the risks of chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer diseases, and the incidence of gastric cancer. However, antibiotic resistance and adverse effects led to the emergence of alternative treatments such as probiotics supplementation. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of incorporating probiotics into the various eradication regimens for H. pylori.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science from inception to May 2023, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing standard therapy (triple or quadrable therapy). for H. pylori with or without probiotic supplementation. Dichotomous data was reported using an odds ratio (OR) for intention-to-treat (ITT) and risk ratios (RR) for side effects with a 95 % confidence interval (CI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 91 RCTs involving 13,680 patients. Adding probiotics to standard treatment was associated with a higher H. pylori eradication rate in the ITT analysis (78.75 % vs 62.43 %, OR = 1.62, 95 % CI: 1.41 to 1.87, P < 0.0001), and per-protocol (PP) analysis (80.33 % vs 72.63 %, OR = 1.60, 95 % CI: 1.34 to 1.91, P < 0.0001). Meanwhile, dyspepsia, gastric ulcer, and peptic ulcer were comparable in both groups. The probiotics group was associated with significantly fewer side effects including, abdominal pain (RR = 0.68, 95 % CI: 0.54 to 0.86), bad taste (RR = 0.64, 95 % CI: 0.53 to 0.78), diarrhea (RR = 0.49, 95 % CI: 0.40 to 0.61), epigastric pain/bloating (RR = 0.76, 95 % CI: 0.65 to 0.88), headache/dizziness (RR = 0.46, 95 % CI: 0.29 to 0.74), (RR = 0.65, 95 % CI: 0.55 to 0.77), or nausea/vomiting (RR = 0.69, 95 % CI: 0.56 to 0.83). The network meta-analysis showed that, compared to the placebo, Bifidobacterium longum had the highest efficacy in eradicating H. pylori (ITT: 81.06 % vs 64.88 %, PP: 88 % vs 75.71 %) (OR = 2.52, 95 % CI: 1.18 to 5.49).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Adding probiotics to standard H. pylori therapy not only increased the rate of eradication but also reduced some of the adverse reactions throughout therapy, particularly nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, epigastric pain/bloating, and taste issues.</p>","PeriodicalId":10352,"journal":{"name":"Clinical nutrition ESPEN","volume":" ","pages":"424-444"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical nutrition ESPEN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clnesp.2024.11.016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection increases the risks of chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer diseases, and the incidence of gastric cancer. However, antibiotic resistance and adverse effects led to the emergence of alternative treatments such as probiotics supplementation. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of incorporating probiotics into the various eradication regimens for H. pylori.
Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science from inception to May 2023, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing standard therapy (triple or quadrable therapy). for H. pylori with or without probiotic supplementation. Dichotomous data was reported using an odds ratio (OR) for intention-to-treat (ITT) and risk ratios (RR) for side effects with a 95 % confidence interval (CI).
Results: We included 91 RCTs involving 13,680 patients. Adding probiotics to standard treatment was associated with a higher H. pylori eradication rate in the ITT analysis (78.75 % vs 62.43 %, OR = 1.62, 95 % CI: 1.41 to 1.87, P < 0.0001), and per-protocol (PP) analysis (80.33 % vs 72.63 %, OR = 1.60, 95 % CI: 1.34 to 1.91, P < 0.0001). Meanwhile, dyspepsia, gastric ulcer, and peptic ulcer were comparable in both groups. The probiotics group was associated with significantly fewer side effects including, abdominal pain (RR = 0.68, 95 % CI: 0.54 to 0.86), bad taste (RR = 0.64, 95 % CI: 0.53 to 0.78), diarrhea (RR = 0.49, 95 % CI: 0.40 to 0.61), epigastric pain/bloating (RR = 0.76, 95 % CI: 0.65 to 0.88), headache/dizziness (RR = 0.46, 95 % CI: 0.29 to 0.74), (RR = 0.65, 95 % CI: 0.55 to 0.77), or nausea/vomiting (RR = 0.69, 95 % CI: 0.56 to 0.83). The network meta-analysis showed that, compared to the placebo, Bifidobacterium longum had the highest efficacy in eradicating H. pylori (ITT: 81.06 % vs 64.88 %, PP: 88 % vs 75.71 %) (OR = 2.52, 95 % CI: 1.18 to 5.49).
Conclusion: Adding probiotics to standard H. pylori therapy not only increased the rate of eradication but also reduced some of the adverse reactions throughout therapy, particularly nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, epigastric pain/bloating, and taste issues.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Nutrition ESPEN is an electronic-only journal and is an official publication of the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN). Nutrition and nutritional care have gained wide clinical and scientific interest during the past decades. The increasing knowledge of metabolic disturbances and nutritional assessment in chronic and acute diseases has stimulated rapid advances in design, development and clinical application of nutritional support. The aims of ESPEN are to encourage the rapid diffusion of knowledge and its application in the field of clinical nutrition and metabolism. Published bimonthly, Clinical Nutrition ESPEN focuses on publishing articles on the relationship between nutrition and disease in the setting of basic science and clinical practice. Clinical Nutrition ESPEN is available to all members of ESPEN and to all subscribers of Clinical Nutrition.