| 1 | Irritable bowel syndrome symptom severity improves equally with probiotic and placebo显示文摘AIM To determine the effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus NCFM on irritable bowel syndrome(IBS) symptoms and quality of life(Qo L).METHODS In this randomized triple-blind trial, adult IBS volunteerswho were recruited according to Rome Ⅲ criteria received 109 or 1010 colony-forming units of NCFM or placebo daily for 12 wk. IBS Symptom Severity Score(IBS-SSS), which constituted the primary outcome, and secondary outcomes, including individual IBS symptoms, IBS-related QoL questionnaire, anxiety and depression, defecation frequency, and stool consistency, were assessed at baseline at the end of the 8-wk runin period, after 4 and 12 wk of intervention, and after a 4-wk washout.RESULTS A total of 340 of 391 randomized volunteers completed the trial. IBS-SSS improved over 12 wk of treatment in all treatment groups, decreasing by a mean ± SD of 44.0 ± 80.2, 50.8 ± 82.4, and 48.3 ± 72.2 in the placebo, active low-dose, and active high-dose groups, respectively. Similarly, secondary outcomes did not differ between treatment groups. However, in a post hoc analysis of volunteers with moderate to severe abdominal pain at baseline(VAS > 35/100), the treatment significantly reduced the sensation of abdominal pain. Pain scores fell by 20.8 ± 22.8, 29.4 ± 17.9, and 31.2 ± 21.9 in the placebo, active low-dose, and active high-dose groups, respectively(P value for placebo vs combined active doses = 0.0460).CONCLUSION NCFM alleviates moderate to severe abdominal pain, consistent with earlier observations of this strain mitigating visceral pain through increased analgesic receptor expression. | Anna Lyra Markku Hillila Teppo Huttunen Sofia Mannikko Mikko Taalikka Julia Tennila Anneli Tarpila Sampo Lahtinen Arthur C Ouwehand Lea Veijola | 2016 | World Journal of Gastroenterology2016，22，48： | 7 |
| 2 | Comparison of bacterial quantities in left and right colon biopsies and faeces显示文摘AIM:To compare quantities of predominant and pathogenic bacteria in mucosal and faecal samples.METHODS:Twenty patients undergoing diagnostic colonoscopy with endoscopically and histologically normal mucosa were recruited to the study,14 subjects of which also supplied faecal(F) samples between 15 d to 105 d post colonoscopy.Mucosal biopsies were taken from each subject from the midportion of the ascending colon(right side samples,RM) and the sigmoid(left side samples,LM).Predominant intestinal and mucosal bacteria including clostridial 16S rRNA gene clusters Ⅳ and ⅩⅣab,Bacteroidetes,Enterobacteriaceae,Bifidobacterium spp.,Akkermansia muciniphila(A.muciniphila),Veillonella spp.,Collinsella spp.,Faecalibacterium prausnitzii(F.prausnitzii) and putative pathogens such asEscherichia coli(E.coli),Clostridium difficile(C.difficile),Helicobacter pylori(H.pylori) and Staphylococcus aureus(S.aureus) were analysed by quantitative polymerase chain reaction(qPCR).Host DNA was quantified from the mucosal samples with human glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase gene targeting qPCR.Paired t tests and the Pearson correlation were applied for statistical analysis.RESULTS:The most prominent bacterial groups were clostridial groups Ⅳ and ⅩⅣa+b andBacteroidetes and bacterial species F.prausnitzii in both sample types.H.pylori and S.aureus were not detected and C.difficile was detected in only one mucosal sample and three faecal samples.E.coli was detected in less than half of the mucosal samples at both sites,but was present in all faecal samples.All detected bacteria,except Enterobacteriaceae,were present at higher levels in the faeces than in the mucosa,but the different locations in the colon presented comparable quantities(RM,LM and F followed byP 1 for RMvs F,P 2 for LMvs F andP 3 for RM vs LM:4.17 ± 0.60 log 10 /g,4.16 ± 0.56 log 10 /g,5.88 ± 1.92 log 10 /g,P 1 = 0.011,P 2 = 0.0069,P 3 = 0.9778 forA.muciniphila;6.25 ± 1.3 log 10 /g,6.09 ± 0.81 log 10 /g,8.84 ± 1.38 log 10 /g,P 1 < 0.0001,P 2 = 0.0002,P 3 = 0.6893 forBacteroidetes;5.27 ± 1.68 log 10 /g,5.38 ± 2.06 log 10 /g,8.20 ± 1.14 log 10 /g,P 1 < 0.0001,P 2 ≤ 0.0001,P 3 = 0.7535 forBifidobacterium spp.;6.44 ± 1.15 log 10 /g,6.07 ±1.45 log 10 /g,9.74 ±1.13 log 10 /g,P 1 < 0.0001,P 2 ≤ 0.0001,P 3 = 0.637 forClostridium cluster Ⅳ;6.65 ± 1.23 log 10 /g,6.57 ± 1.52 log 10 /g,9.13 ± 0.96 log 10 /g,P 1 < 0.0001,P 2 ≤ 0.0001,P 3 = 0.9317 forClostridium cluster ⅩⅣa;4.57 ± 1.44 log10/g,4.63 ± 1.34 log10/g,7.05 ± 2.48 log 10 /g,P 1 = 0.012,P 2 = 0.0357,P 3 = 0.7973 for Collinsella spp.;7.66 ± 1.50 log 10 /g,7.60 ± 1.05 log 10 /g,10.02 ± 2.02 log 10 /g,P 1 ≤ 0.0001,P 2 = 0.0013,P 3 = 0.9919 forF.prausnitzsii;6.17 ± 1.3 log 10 /g,5.85 ± 0.93 log 10 /g,7.25 ± 1.01 log 10 /g,P 1 = 0.0243,P 2 = 0.0319,P 3 = 0.6982 for Veillonella spp.;4.68 ± 1.21 log 10 /g,4.71 ± 0.83 log 10 /g,5.70 ± 2.00 log 10 /g,P 1 = 0.1927,P 2 = 0.0605,P 3 = 0.6476 forEnterobacteriaceae).TheBifidobacterium spp.counts correlated significantly between mucosal sites and mucosal and faecal samples(Pearson correlation coefficients 0.62,P = 0.040 and 0.81,P = 0.005 between the right mucosal sample and faeces and the left mucosal sample and faeces,respectively).CONCLUSION:Non-invasive faecal samples do not reflect bacterial counts on the mucosa at the individual level,except for bifidobacteria often analysed in probiotic intervention studies. | Anna Lyra Sofia Forssten Peter Rolny Yvonne Wettergren Sampo J Lahtinen Krista Salli Lennart Cedgrd Elisabeth Odin Bengt Gustavsson Arthur C Ouwehand | 2012 | World Journal of Gastroenterology2012，18，32： | 2 |
您所在的机构暂未开通此部分的功能，请联系管理员