Lactobacillus reuteri DSM17938 has shown promise in managing colic, but conflicting study results have prevented a consensus on whether it is truly effective. Through an individual participant data meta-analysis, we sought to definitively determine if L reuteri DSM17938 effectively reduces crying and/or fussing time in infants with colic and whether effects vary by feeding type. We searched online databases (PubMed, Medline, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Cochrane), e-abstracts, and clinical trial registries. These were double-blind randomized controlled trials (published by June 2017) of L reuteri DSM17398 versus a placebo, delivered orally to infants with colic, with outcomes of infant crying and/or fussing duration and treatment success at 21 days. We collected individual participant raw data from included studies modeled simultaneously in multilevel generalized linear mixed-effects regression models. Four double-blind trials involving 345 infants with colic (174 probiotic and 171 placebo) were included. The probiotic group averaged less crying and/or fussing time than the placebo group at all time points (day 21 adjusted mean difference in change from baseline [minutes] −25.4 [95% confidence interval (CI): −47.3 to −3.5]). The probiotic group was almost twice as likely as the placebo group to experience treatment success at all time points (day 21 adjusted incidence ratio 1.7 [95% CI: 1.4 to 2.2]). Intervention effects were dramatic in breastfed infants (number needed to treat for day 21 success 2.6 [95% CI: 2.0 to 3.6]) but were insignificant in formula-fed infants. There were insufficient data to make conclusions for formula-fed infants with colic. L reuteri DSM17938 is effective and can be recommended for breastfed infants with colic. Its role in formula-fed infants with colic needs further research.
1 August 2019 in Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition
The second and third trimesters of pregnancy are crucial for the anatomical and functional development of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. If premature birth occurs, the immaturity of the digestive and absorptive processes and of GI motility represent a critical challenge to meet adequate nutritional needs, leading to poor extrauterine growth and to other critical complications. Knowledge of the main developmental stages of the processes involved in the digestion and absorption of proteins, carbohydrates, and lipids, as well as of the maturational phases underlying the development of GI motility, may aid clinicians to optimize the nutritional management of preterm infants. The immaturity of these GI systems and functions may negatively influence the patterns of gut colonization, predisposing to an abnormal microbiome. This, in turn, further contributes to alter the functional, immune, and neural development of the GI tract and, especially in preterm infants, has been associated with an increased risk of severe GI complications, such as necrotizing enterocolitis. Deeper understanding of the physiological colonization patterns in term and preterm infants may support the promotion of these patterns and the avoidance of microbial perturbations associated with the development of several diseases throughout life. This review aims to provide a global overview on the maturational features of the main GI functions and on their implications following preterm birth. We will particularly focus on the developmental differences in intestinal digestion and absorption functionality, motility, gut–brain axis interaction, and microbiomes.
1 March 2019 in Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology
Goals: The goals of this study were to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a probiotic mixture in patients with celiac disease (CD) with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)-type symptoms despite a strict gluten-free diet (GFD). Background: About 30% of patients with CD adherent to a GFD suffer from IBS-type symptoms; a possible cause resides in the imbalances of the intestinal microbiota in CD. Probiotics may represent a potential treatment. Study: CD patients with IBS-type symptoms entered a prospective, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled study. A 6-week treatment period was preceded by a 2-week run-in and followed by a 6-week follow-up phase. Clinical data were monitored throughout the study by validated questionnaires: IBS Severity Scoring System (IBS-SSS); Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS); Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS); and IBS Quality of Life Questionnaire (IBS-QOL). The fecal microbiota were assayed using plate counts and 16S rRNA gene-based analysis. Results: In total, 109 patients were randomized to probiotics (n=54) or placebo (n=55). IBS-SSS and GSRS decreased significantly in probiotics, as compared with placebo [(−15.9%±14.8% vs. 8.2%±25.9%; P<0.001) and (−19.8%±16.6% vs. 12.9%±31.6%; P<0.001)], respectively. Treatment success was significantly higher in patients receiving probiotics, as compared with placebo (15.3% vs. 3.8%; P<0.04). Presumptive lactic acid bacteria, Staphylococcus and Bifidobacterium, increased in patients receiving probiotic treatment. No adverse events were reported. Conclusions: A 6-week probiotic treatment is effective in improving the severity of IBS-type symptoms, in CD patients on strict GFD, and is associated with a modification of gut microbiota, characterized by an increase of bifidobacteria.