IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0048811.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effects of Probiotic Supplementation on Experimental Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Carlijn R Hooijmans
  • Rob B M de Vries
  • Maroeska M Rovers
  • Hein G Gooszen
  • Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga

Abstract

Background: In February 2008, the results of the PRObiotics in PAncreatitis TRIAl (PROPATRIA) were published. This study investigated the use of probiotics in patients suffering from severe acute pancreatitis. No differences between the groups were found for any of the primary endpoints. However, mortality in the probiotics group was significantly higher than in the placebo group. This result was unexpected in light of the results of the animal studies referred to in the trial protocol. We used the methods of systematic review and meta-analysis to take a closer look at the relation between the animal studies on probiotics and pancreatitis and the PROPATRIA-trial, focussing on indications for harmful effects and efficacy. Methods and results: Both PubMed and Embase were searched for original articles concerning the effects of probiotics in experimental acute pancreatitis, yielding thirteen studies that met the inclusion criteria. Data on mortality, bacterial translocation and histological damage to the pancreas were extracted, as well as study quality indicators. Meta-analysis of the four animal studies published before PROPATRIA showed that probiotic supplementation did not diminish mortality, reduced the overall histopathological score of the pancreas and reduced bacterial translocation to pancreas and mesenteric lymph nodes. Comparable results were found when all relevant studies published so far were taken into account. Conclusions: A more thorough analysis of all relevant animal studies carried out before (and after) the publication of the study protocol of the PROPATRIA trial could not have predicted the harmful effects of probiotics found in the PROPATRIA-trial. Moreover, meta-analysis of the preclinical animal studies did show evidence for efficacy. It may be suggested, however, that the most appropriate animal experiments in relation to the design of the human trial have not yet been conducted, which compromises a fair comparison between the results of the animal studies and the PROPATRIA trial.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlijn R Hooijmans & Rob B M de Vries & Maroeska M Rovers & Hein G Gooszen & Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga, 2012. "The Effects of Probiotic Supplementation on Experimental Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-12, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0048811
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048811
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0048811
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0048811&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0048811?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Malcolm Macleod, 2011. "Why animal research needs to improve," Nature, Nature, vol. 477(7366), pages 511-511, September.
    2. Carol Kilkenny & William J Browne & Innes C Cuthill & Michael Emerson & Douglas G Altman, 2010. "Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(6), pages 1-5, June.
    3. Carol Kilkenny & Nick Parsons & Ed Kadyszewski & Michael F W Festing & Innes C Cuthill & Derek Fry & Jane Hutton & Douglas G Altman, 2009. "Survey of the Quality of Experimental Design, Statistical Analysis and Reporting of Research Using Animals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(11), pages 1-11, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:plo:pmed00:1001482 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Thirumalai Diraviyam & Bin Zhao & Yuan Wang & Ruediger Schade & Antonysamy Michael & Xiaoying Zhang, 2014. "Effect of Chicken Egg Yolk Antibodies (IgY) against Diarrhea in Domesticated Animals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-14, May.
    3. Sabina Fijan, 2014. "Microorganisms with Claimed Probiotic Properties: An Overview of Recent Literature," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-23, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:plo:pone00:0215221 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:plo:pone00:0154657 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Vivian Leung & Frédérik Rousseau-Blass & Guy Beauchamp & Daniel S J Pang, 2018. "ARRIVE has not ARRIVEd: Support for the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of in vivo Experiments) guidelines does not improve the reporting quality of papers in animal welfare, analgesia or anesthesi," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(5), pages 1-13, May.
    4. Beverly S Muhlhausler & Frank H Bloomfield & Matthew W Gillman, 2013. "Whole Animal Experiments Should Be More Like Human Randomized Controlled Trials," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-6, February.
    5. repec:plo:pmed00:1001010 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:plo:pbio00:1002273 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. David Baker & Katie Lidster & Ana Sottomayor & Sandra Amor, 2014. "Two Years Later: Journals Are Not Yet Enforcing the ARRIVE Guidelines on Reporting Standards for Pre-Clinical Animal Studies," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-6, January.
    8. repec:plo:pbio00:1000413 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Olivia Hogue & Tucker Harvey & Dena Crozier & Claire Sonneborn & Abagail Postle & Hunter Block-Beach & Eashwar Somasundaram & Francis J May & Monica Snyder Braun & Felicia L Pasadyn & Khandi King & Ca, 2022. "Statistical practice and transparent reporting in the neurosciences: Preclinical motor behavioral experiments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-17, March.
    10. repec:plo:pbio00:1001757 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. repec:plo:pone00:0089981 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Airi Jo-Watanabe & Toshiki Inaba & Takahiro Osada & Ryota Hashimoto & Tomohiro Nishizawa & Toshiaki Okuno & Sayoko Ihara & Kazushige Touhara & Nobutaka Hattori & Masatsugu Oh-Hora & Osamu Nureki & Tak, 2024. "Bicarbonate signalling via G protein-coupled receptor regulates ischaemia-reperfusion injury," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    13. M Polyakova & M L Schroeter & B M Elzinga & S Holiga & P Schoenknecht & E R de Kloet & M L Molendijk, 2015. "Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor and Antidepressive Effect of Electroconvulsive Therapy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of the Preclinical and Clinical Literature," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, November.
    14. Kimberley E Wever & Carlijn R Hooijmans & Niels P Riksen & Thomas B Sterenborg & Emily S Sena & Merel Ritskes-Hoitinga & Michiel C Warlé, 2015. "Determinants of the Efficacy of Cardiac Ischemic Preconditioning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Animal Studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
    15. Bettina Bert & Céline Heinl & Justyna Chmielewska & Franziska Schwarz & Barbara Grune & Andreas Hensel & Matthias Greiner & Gilbert Schönfelder, 2019. "Refining animal research: The Animal Study Registry," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(10), pages 1-12, October.
    16. Konrad Neumann & Ulrike Grittner & Sophie K Piper & Andre Rex & Oscar Florez-Vargas & George Karystianis & Alice Schneider & Ian Wellwood & Bob Siegerink & John P A Ioannidis & Jonathan Kimmelman & Ul, 2017. "Increasing efficiency of preclinical research by group sequential designs," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-9, March.
    17. Xiao-meng Xu & Guang-yan Cai & Ru Bu & Wen-juan Wang & Xue-yuan Bai & Xue-feng Sun & Xiang-mei Chen, 2015. "Beneficial Effects of Caloric Restriction on Chronic Kidney Disease in Rodent Models: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, December.
    18. Zhongwei Xu & Bingze Xu & Susanna L. Lundström & Àlex Moreno-Giró & Danxia Zhao & Myriam Martin & Erik Lönnblom & Qixing Li & Alexander Krämer & Changrong Ge & Lei Cheng & Bibo Liang & Dongmei Tong & , 2023. "A subset of type-II collagen-binding antibodies prevents experimental arthritis by inhibiting FCGR3 signaling in neutrophils," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    19. Nathalie Percie du Sert & Viki Hurst & Amrita Ahluwalia & Sabina Alam & Marc T Avey & Monya Baker & William J Browne & Alejandra Clark & Innes C Cuthill & Ulrich Dirnagl & Michael Emerson & Paul Garne, 2020. "The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(7), pages 1-12, July.
    20. repec:plo:pone00:0240719 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Simon Bate & Natasha A Karp, 2014. "A Common Control Group - Optimising the Experiment Design to Maximise Sensitivity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-12, December.
    22. Laura Maxim & Jeroen P van der Sluijs, 2014. "Qualichem In Vivo : A Tool for Assessing the Quality of In Vivo Studies and Its Application for Bisphenol A," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, January.
    23. repec:plo:pbio00:2005282 is not listed on IDEAS
    24. repec:plo:pone00:0230038 is not listed on IDEAS
    25. repec:plo:pone00:0195321 is not listed on IDEAS
    26. Constance Holman & Sophie K Piper & Ulrike Grittner & Andreas Antonios Diamantaras & Jonathan Kimmelman & Bob Siegerink & Ulrich Dirnagl, 2016. "Where Have All the Rodents Gone? The Effects of Attrition in Experimental Research on Cancer and Stroke," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, January.
    27. Thirumalai Diraviyam & Bin Zhao & Yuan Wang & Ruediger Schade & Antonysamy Michael & Xiaoying Zhang, 2014. "Effect of Chicken Egg Yolk Antibodies (IgY) against Diarrhea in Domesticated Animals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-14, May.
    28. Ashima Sakhuja & Ritobrata Bhattacharyya & Yash Tushar Katakia & Shyam Kumar Ramakrishnan & Srinjoy Chakraborty & Hariharan Jayakumar & Shailesh Mani Tripathi & Niyati Pandya Thakkar & Sumukh Thakar &, 2025. "S-nitrosylation of EZH2 alters PRC2 assembly, methyltransferase activity, and EZH2 stability to maintain endothelial homeostasis," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-23, December.
    29. repec:plo:pbio00:2004879 is not listed on IDEAS
    30. repec:plo:pone00:0166733 is not listed on IDEAS
    31. Rebecca Tuvel, 2015. "Against the Use of Knowledge Gained from Animal Experimentation," Societies, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-25, March.
    32. Chunyan Cai & Jin Piao & Jing Ning & Xuelin Huang, 2018. "Efficient Two-Stage Designs and Proper Inference for Animal Studies," Statistics in Biosciences, Springer;International Chinese Statistical Association, vol. 10(1), pages 217-232, April.
    33. Bertha Estrella & Elena N. Naumova & Magda Cepeda & Trudy Voortman & Peter D. Katsikis & Hemmo A. Drexhage, 2019. "Effects of Air Pollution on Lung Innate Lymphoid Cells: Review of In Vitro and In Vivo Experimental Studies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-15, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0048811. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.