Journal of Hepatology and Gastrointestinal disorders
Open Access
ISSN: 2475-3181
ISSN: 2475-3181
Lynne V McFarland
University of Washington, USA
Posters & Accepted Abstracts: J Hepatol Gastroint Dis
As the use and diversity of probiotic products expands, the choice of an appropriate type of probiotic is challenging for both medical care professionals and the public alike. Two vital factors in choosing the appropriate probiotic are often ignored, namely the probiotic strain-specificity and disease-specificity for efficacy. A systematic review of the literature (1970-2017) assessing strain-specific and disease-specific probiotic efficacy was conducted. Among 216 included trials, strong efficacy evidence was found for 7 (70%) of probiotic strain(s) among four preventive indications and 11 (69%) probiotic strain(s) among four treatment indications. Strain-specific efficacy for preventing adult AAD was clearly demonstrated within the Lactobacillus species [e.g., by the mixture of L. acidophilus CL1285, L. casei LBC80R and L. rhamnosus CLR2 (Bio-K+), by L. casei DN114001 (Actimel) and by L. reuteri 55730], while other Lactobacillus strains did not show efficacy. Significant disease-specific variations in efficacy were demonstrated by Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Saccharomyces boulardii CNCM I-745, as well as other probiotic strains. Strong evidence was found supporting the hypothesis that the efficacy of probiotics is both strain-specific and diseasespecific. Clinical guidelines and meta-analyses need to recognize the importance of reporting outcomes by both specific strain(s) of probiotics and the type of disease. The clinical relevance of these findings indicates healthcare providers need to take these two factors into consideration when recommending the appropriate probiotic for their patient.
E-mail: lvmcfarl@u.washington.edu