Gastroenterology Unit, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, Corso Mazzini, Novara, Italy.
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2012 Oct;46 Suppl:S85-92. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e3182672796.
Beneficial findings concerning probiotics are increasing day by day. However, one of the most important parameters able to significantly affect the probiotic value of a microorganism is its survival during the transit through the stomach and the duodenum. Some techniques may be applied that aim to improve this parameter, but microencapsulation of bacterial cells remains one of the most important. A recent study assessed the kinetics of intestinal colonization by a mixture of 2 probiotic strains, given either in a microencapsulated or in a traditional, uncoated form.
A comparison between the intestinal colonization by associating 5 microencapsulated bacteria and the same uncoated strains was performed by a double-blind, randomized, cross-over study. The study (December 2007 to January 2009) involved 53 healthy volunteers. In particular, subjects were divided into 2 groups: group A (27 subjects) was given a mix of probiotic strains Probiotical S.p.A. (Novara, Italy), Lactobacillus acidophilus LA02 (DSM 21717), Lactobacillus rhamnosus LR04 (DSM 16605), L. rhamnosus GG, or LGG (ATCC 53103), L. rhamnosus LR06 (DSM 21981), and Bifidobacterium lactis BS01 (LMG P-21384) in an uncoated form, whereas group B (26 subjects) received the same strains microencapsulated with a gastroprotected material. The uncoated strains were administered at 5×10⁹ cfu/strain/d (a total of 25×10⁹ cfu/d) for 21 days, whereas the microencapsulated bacteria were given at 1×10⁹ cfu/strain/d (a total of 5×10⁹ cfu/d) for 21 days. At the end of the first period of supplementation with probiotics, a 3-week wash-out phase was included in the study setting. At the end of the wash-out period, the groups crossed over their treatment regimen; that is, group A was administered the microencapsulated bacteria and group B the uncoated bacteria. The administered quantities of each strain were the same as the first treatment. A quantitative evaluation of intestinal colonization by probiotics, either microencapsulated or uncoated, was undertaken by examining fecal samples at the beginning of the study (time 0), after 10 days and after 21 days of each treatment period. In particular, fecal total Lactobacilli, heterofermentative Lactobacilli, and total Bifidobacteria were quantified at each checkpoint. A genomic analysis of an appropriate number of colonies was performed to quantify individual L. rhamnosus strains among heterofermentative Lactobacilli.
A statistically significant increase in the fecal amounts of total Lactobacilli, heterofermentative Lactobacilli, and total Bifidobacteria was registered in both groups at the end of each supplementation period compared with d₀ or d₄₂ (group A: P=0.0002, P=0.0001, and P<0.0001 at d₂₁, P=0.0060, P=0.0069, and P<0.0001 at d₆₃ for total Lactobacilli, heterofermentative Lactobacilli, and Bifidobacteria, respectively; group B: P=0.0002, P=0.0006, and P<0.0001 at d₂₁, P=0.0015, P=0.0016, and P<0.0001 at d₆₃ for total Lactobacilli, heterofermentative Lactobacilli, and Bifidobacteria, respectively), confirming the ability of each strain in the administered composition to colonize the human gut, whether supplemented in a gastroprotected or in a traditional freeze-dried form. On the contrary, subjects receiving microencapsulated bacteria reported a kinetics of intestinal colonization that was entirely comparable with those who were given uncoated strains at a 5 times higher amount.
The microencapsulation technique used in this study is a valid approach aimed to significantly improve the survival of strains during gastroduodenal transit, thus enhancing their probiotic value and allowing the use of a 5 times lower amount.
有益的发现关于益生菌日益增多。然而,一个最重要的参数能够显著影响益生菌的价值的微生物是它的生存能力通过胃和十二指肠。一些技术可以应用,旨在提高这一参数,但细菌细胞的微囊化仍然是最重要的。最近的一项研究评估了肠道定植的混合益生菌菌株 2,无论是在一个微囊化或传统的,未涂层的形式。
通过双盲、随机、交叉研究比较了 5 种微囊化细菌和相同未包被菌株的肠道定植情况。研究(2007 年 12 月至 2009 年 1 月)涉及 53 名健康志愿者。具体来说,受试者分为 2 组:A 组(27 名受试者)给予益生菌 Probiotical S.p.A.(诺瓦拉,意大利)、嗜酸乳杆菌 LA02(DSM 21717)、鼠李糖乳杆菌 LR04(DSM 16605)、L. rhamnosus GG 或 LGG(ATCC 53103)、鼠李糖乳杆菌 LR06(DSM 21981)和双歧杆菌 BS01(LMG P-21384)的混合物,以未包被的形式,而 B 组(26 名受试者)以胃保护材料微囊化的相同菌株。未包被的菌株以 5×10⁹ cfu/株/天(共 25×10⁹ cfu/d)的剂量给予 21 天,而微囊化的细菌以 1×10⁹ cfu/株/天(共 5×10⁹ cfu/d)的剂量给予 21 天。在补充益生菌的第一阶段结束时,研究中包括一个为期 3 周的洗脱期。在洗脱期结束时,两组交叉他们的治疗方案;即,A 组给予微囊化细菌,B 组给予未包被细菌。每种菌株的给药量与第一治疗相同。通过检查研究开始时(时间 0)、第 10 天和第 21 天的粪便样本,对益生菌的肠道定植进行了定量评估。特别是,在每个检查点都定量了粪便总乳酸杆菌、异型发酵乳酸杆菌和总双歧杆菌。对适当数量的菌落进行基因组分析,以量化异型发酵乳酸杆菌中的鼠李糖乳杆菌菌株。
与 d₀ 或 d₄₂(A 组:在每个补充期结束时,总乳酸杆菌、异型发酵乳酸杆菌和双歧杆菌的粪便量与 d0 或 d42 相比均有统计学显著增加,P=0.0002,P=0.0001,P<0.0001 在 d21,P=0.0060,P=0.0069,P<0.0001 在 d63 时;B 组:P=0.0002,P=0.0006,P<0.0001 在 d21,P=0.0015,P=0.0016,P<0.0001 在 d63 时,总乳酸杆菌、异型发酵乳酸杆菌和双歧杆菌分别),证实了给药组成中每个菌株定植于人类肠道的能力,无论是以胃保护还是传统的冷冻干燥形式补充。相反,接受微囊化细菌的受试者报告的肠道定植动力学与接受 5 倍高剂量未包被菌株的受试者完全可比。
本研究中使用的微囊化技术是一种有效的方法,旨在显著提高菌株在胃十二指肠转运过程中的存活率,从而提高其益生菌价值,并允许使用 5 倍低的剂量。