Rebecca G Harris, Elizabeth P Neale, Marijka Batterham
{"title":"儿童功能性便秘维持疗法中益生菌与药物治疗的疗效比较：系统回顾与网络元分析》。","authors":"Rebecca G Harris, Elizabeth P Neale, Marijka Batterham","doi":"10.1093/nutrit/nuae119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>There has been an increase in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics with various maintenance therapies, such as polyethylene glycol, lactulose, and mineral oil, to treat functional constipation in children.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim was to compare probiotics with all other oral maintenance therapies for functional constipation in children and rank all treatments in terms of effectiveness in a network meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>RCTs were identified through systematically searching the MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, trial registries, and forward and backward citation searching. Within-study risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and confidence in the estimates was assessed using the CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) framework. Random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were pooled from 41 and 29 RCTs for network meta-analysis of defecation frequency and treatment success, respectively. Probiotics did not significantly increase the number of bowel movements per week when compared with any conventional treatment or placebo. A combination of mineral oil and probiotics was the most effective treatment for increasing defecation frequency (mean difference: 3.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64, 5.63). The most effective treatments for increasing the risk of treatment success as compared with placebo were mineral oil (relative risk [RR]: 2.41; 95% CI: 1.53, 3.81) and a combined treatment of polyethylene glycol and lactulose (RR: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.21, 4.97). Confidence in the estimates ranged from very low to moderate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Currently, there is no evidence to suggest that probiotics should be used as a standalone treatment for functional constipation in children. More high-quality studies are needed to evaluate different strains of probiotics and their potential benefit as an additional treatment component to conventional treatments. Mineral oil and polyethylene glycol were the most effective treatments to increase defecation frequency and treatment success rates and should remain the first line of treatment for children with functional constipation.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO registration no.</p><p><p>CRD42022360977 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=360977).</p>","PeriodicalId":19469,"journal":{"name":"Nutrition reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of Probiotics Compared With Pharmacological Treatments for Maintenance Therapy for Functional Constipation in Children: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Rebecca G Harris, Elizabeth P Neale, Marijka Batterham\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/nutrit/nuae119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>There has been an increase in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics with various maintenance therapies, such as polyethylene glycol, lactulose, and mineral oil, to treat functional constipation in children.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim was to compare probiotics with all other oral maintenance therapies for functional constipation in children and rank all treatments in terms of effectiveness in a network meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>RCTs were identified through systematically searching the MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, trial registries, and forward and backward citation searching. Within-study risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and confidence in the estimates was assessed using the CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) framework. Random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were pooled from 41 and 29 RCTs for network meta-analysis of defecation frequency and treatment success, respectively. Probiotics did not significantly increase the number of bowel movements per week when compared with any conventional treatment or placebo. A combination of mineral oil and probiotics was the most effective treatment for increasing defecation frequency (mean difference: 3.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64, 5.63). The most effective treatments for increasing the risk of treatment success as compared with placebo were mineral oil (relative risk [RR]: 2.41; 95% CI: 1.53, 3.81) and a combined treatment of polyethylene glycol and lactulose (RR: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.21, 4.97). Confidence in the estimates ranged from very low to moderate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Currently, there is no evidence to suggest that probiotics should be used as a standalone treatment for functional constipation in children. More high-quality studies are needed to evaluate different strains of probiotics and their potential benefit as an additional treatment component to conventional treatments. Mineral oil and polyethylene glycol were the most effective treatments to increase defecation frequency and treatment success rates and should remain the first line of treatment for children with functional constipation.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO registration no.</p><p><p>CRD42022360977 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=360977).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19469,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nutrition reviews\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nutrition reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuae119\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nutrition reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuae119","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Efficacy of Probiotics Compared With Pharmacological Treatments for Maintenance Therapy for Functional Constipation in Children: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.
Context: There has been an increase in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics with various maintenance therapies, such as polyethylene glycol, lactulose, and mineral oil, to treat functional constipation in children.
Objective: The aim was to compare probiotics with all other oral maintenance therapies for functional constipation in children and rank all treatments in terms of effectiveness in a network meta-analysis.
Methods: RCTs were identified through systematically searching the MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, trial registries, and forward and backward citation searching. Within-study risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and confidence in the estimates was assessed using the CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) framework. Random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted.
Results: Data were pooled from 41 and 29 RCTs for network meta-analysis of defecation frequency and treatment success, respectively. Probiotics did not significantly increase the number of bowel movements per week when compared with any conventional treatment or placebo. A combination of mineral oil and probiotics was the most effective treatment for increasing defecation frequency (mean difference: 3.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64, 5.63). The most effective treatments for increasing the risk of treatment success as compared with placebo were mineral oil (relative risk [RR]: 2.41; 95% CI: 1.53, 3.81) and a combined treatment of polyethylene glycol and lactulose (RR: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.21, 4.97). Confidence in the estimates ranged from very low to moderate.
Conclusion: Currently, there is no evidence to suggest that probiotics should be used as a standalone treatment for functional constipation in children. More high-quality studies are needed to evaluate different strains of probiotics and their potential benefit as an additional treatment component to conventional treatments. Mineral oil and polyethylene glycol were the most effective treatments to increase defecation frequency and treatment success rates and should remain the first line of treatment for children with functional constipation.
期刊介绍：
Nutrition Reviews is a highly cited, monthly, international, peer-reviewed journal that specializes in the publication of authoritative and critical literature reviews on current and emerging topics in nutrition science, food science, clinical nutrition, and nutrition policy. Readers of Nutrition Reviews include nutrition scientists, biomedical researchers, clinical and dietetic practitioners, and advanced students of nutrition.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
