López Martí Á, Montero Palma C, López Martí H, Ranchal Sánchez A
Institute of Postgraduate Studies, University of Cordoba, Cordoba, Spain.
Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Cordoba, Cordoba, Spain.
J Small Anim Pract. 2025 Apr;66(4):219-235. doi: 10.1111/jsap.13822. Epub 2025 Jan 12.
The clinical efficacy of the use of probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics and postbiotics (biotics) in cats is unknown, despite their use in daily practice. The objectives of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of biotic supplementation in treating and preventing gastroenteropathies, and in reducing gastrointestinal signs associated with antibiotics in cats.
A systematic review was conducted by searching four databases for publications before August 2, 2024, following a pre-registered protocol. Eligible publications were trials involving healthy cats or those with gastroenteropathies, supplemented with biotics (and an inactive control), studying outcomes such as faecal consistency, faecal microbiota or vomiting. Risk of bias and quality of reports were assessed. Effects were synthesised by meta-analyses and vote counting based on direction of effect. Certainty of evidence was rated using GRADE approach.
Twenty reports were included, presenting unclear or low risk of bias. The evidence did not permit a high-confidence evaluation of the effectiveness of biotics, although five of the seven probiotic trials showed beneficial effects on faecal consistency. Synbiotics presented no clinically relevant effect in reducing antibiotics-associated vomiting, with very low certainty, in a meta-analysis including 32 adult cats. Probiotics significantly reduce the Bacillota/Actinomycetota ratio, with low certainty, in a meta-analysis involving 34 healthy young-adult cats. Following vote counting, probiotics improved immune profile in young cats, and increased butyric acid concentration in healthy cats.
Current data highlight the need for further research, especially focused on at-risk groups and sick cats, before advocating the use of biotic supplementation.
尽管益生菌、益生元、合生元和后生元(统称为“生物制剂”)已在日常实践中使用,但其在猫身上的临床疗效尚不清楚。本研究的目的是评估补充生物制剂在治疗和预防猫胃肠疾病以及减轻与抗生素相关的胃肠道症状方面的有效性。
按照预先注册的方案,通过检索四个数据库来进行系统评价,检索截至2024年8月2日的出版物。符合条件的出版物为涉及健康猫或患有胃肠疾病的猫的试验,这些试验补充了生物制剂(以及无活性对照),研究诸如粪便稠度、粪便微生物群或呕吐等结果。评估报告的偏倚风险和质量。根据效应方向,通过荟萃分析和投票计数来综合效应。使用GRADE方法对证据的确定性进行评级。
纳入了20份报告,其偏倚风险不明确或较低。尽管七项益生菌试验中有五项显示对粪便稠度有有益影响,但证据并不允许对生物制剂的有效性进行高置信度评估。在一项纳入32只成年猫的荟萃分析中,合生元在降低抗生素相关呕吐方面没有显示出临床相关效应,确定性非常低。在一项涉及34只健康年轻成年猫的荟萃分析中,益生菌以较低的确定性显著降低了厚壁菌门/放线菌门的比例。通过投票计数发现,益生菌改善了幼猫的免疫状况,并增加了健康猫体内丁酸的浓度。
目前的数据突出了在提倡使用生物制剂补充之前需要进一步研究的必要性,特别是针对高危群体和患病猫的研究。