考克兰评论:益生菌预防急性上呼吸道感染
Cochrane Commentary: Probiotics For Prevention of Acute Upper Respiratory Infection.
作者信息
Quick Melissa
出版信息
Explore (NY). 2015 Sep-Oct;11(5):418-20. doi: 10.1016/j.explore.2015.07.012. Epub 2015 Jul 6.
BACKGROUND
Probiotics may improve a person's health by regulating their immune function. Some trials have shown that probiotic strains can prevent respiratory infections. Even though the previous version of our review showed benefits of probiotics for acute upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs), several new studies have been published.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of probiotics (any specified strain or dose), compared with placebo, in the prevention of acute URTIs in people of all ages, who are at risk of acute URTIs.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1950 to July week 3, 2014), EMBASE (1974 to July 2014), Web of Science (1900 to July 2014), the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, which includes the China Biological Medicine Database (from 1978 to July 2014), the Chinese Medicine Popular Science Literature Database (from 2000 to July 2014) and the Masters Degree Dissertation of Beijing Union Medical College Database (from 1981 to July 2014). We also searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov for completed and ongoing trials on 31 July 2014.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics with placebo to prevent acute URTIs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the eligibility and quality of trials, and extracted data using the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 13 RCTs, although we could only extract data to meta-analyze 12 trials, which involved 3720 participants including children, adults (aged around 40 years) and older people. We found that probiotics were better than placebo when measuring the number of participants experiencing episodes of acute URTI [at least one episode: odds ratio (OR): 0.53; 95% CI = 0.37-0.76, P < .001, low quality evidence; at least three episodes: OR: 0.53; 95% CI = 0.36-0.80, P = .002, low quality evidence]; the mean duration of an episode of acute URTI [mean difference (MD): -1.89; 95% CI = -2.03 to -1.75, P < .001, low quality evidence]; reduced antibiotic prescription rates for acute URTIs (OR: 0.65; 95% CI = 0.45-0.94, moderate quality evidence) and cold-related school absence (OR: 0.10; 95% CI = 0.02-0.47, very low quality evidence). Probiotics and placebo were similar when measuring the rate ratio of episodes of acute URTI (rate ratio: 0.83; 95% CI = 0.66-1.05, P = .12, very low quality evidence) and adverse events (OR: 0.88; 95% CI = 0.65-1.19, P = .40, low quality evidence). Side effects of probiotics were minor and gastrointestinal symptoms were the most common. We found that some subgroups had a high level of heterogeneity when we conducted pooled analyses and the evidence level was low or very low quality.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Probiotics were better than placebo in reducing the number of participants experiencing episodes of acute URTI, the mean duration of an episode of acute URTI, antibiotic use and cold-related school absence. This indicates that probiotics may be more beneficial than placebo for preventing acute URTIs. However, the quality of the evidence was low or very low.
背景
益生菌可通过调节免疫功能改善人体健康。一些试验表明,益生菌菌株可预防呼吸道感染。尽管我们之前版本的综述显示益生菌对急性上呼吸道感染(URTIs)有益,但已有多项新研究发表。
目的
评估与安慰剂相比,益生菌(任何特定菌株或剂量)在预防有急性URTIs风险的各年龄段人群急性URTIs方面的有效性和安全性。
检索方法
我们检索了Cochrane系统评价数据库(CENTRAL,2014年第6期)、医学期刊数据库(MEDLINE,1950年至2014年7月第3周)、荷兰医学文摘数据库(EMBASE,1974年至2014年7月)、科学引文索引数据库(Web of Science,1900年至2014年7月)、中国生物医学文献数据库,其中包括中国生物医学数据库(1978年至2014年7月)、中医科普文献数据库(2000年至2014年7月)以及北京协和医学院硕士学位论文数据库(1981年至2014年7月)。我们还检索了世界卫生组织(WHO)国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)和ClinicalTrials.gov,以获取2014年7月31日已完成和正在进行的试验。
入选标准
比较益生菌与安慰剂预防急性URTIs的随机对照试验(RCTs)。
数据收集与分析
两位综述作者独立评估试验的合格性和质量,并使用Cochrane协作网期望的标准方法程序提取数据。
主要结果
我们纳入了13项RCTs,尽管我们只能提取数据对12项试验进行荟萃分析,这些试验涉及3720名参与者,包括儿童、成年人(约40岁)和老年人。我们发现,在测量经历急性URTI发作的参与者数量时,益生菌优于安慰剂[至少一次发作:比值比(OR):0.53;95%置信区间(CI)=0.37 - 0.76,P <.001,低质量证据;至少三次发作:OR:0.53;95% CI = 0.36 - 0.80,P =.002,低质量证据];急性URTI发作的平均持续时间[平均差(MD):-1.89;95% CI = -2.03至-1.75,P <.001,低质量证据];降低急性URTIs的抗生素处方率(OR:0.65;95% CI = 0.45 - 0.94,中等质量证据)以及与感冒相关的学校缺勤率(OR:0.10;95% CI = 0.02 - 0.47,极低质量证据)。在测量急性URTI发作的发生率比值(发生率比值:0.83;95% CI = 0.66 - 1.05,P =.12,极低质量证据)和不良事件(OR:0.88;95% CI = 0.65 - 1.19,P =.40,低质量证据)时,益生菌和安慰剂相似。益生菌的副作用较小,胃肠道症状最为常见。我们发现,在进行汇总分析时,一些亚组存在高度异质性,证据水平为低质量或极低质量。
作者结论
在减少经历急性URTI发作的参与者数量、急性URTI发作的平均持续时间、抗生素使用以及与感冒相关的学校缺勤方面,益生菌优于安慰剂。这表明益生菌在预防急性URTIs方面可能比安慰剂更有益。然而,证据质量为低质量或极低质量。