Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27081478›Full record

ReviewF1000Research2016

Probiotics in critically ill children.

Sunit C Singhi, Suresh Kumar

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in F1000Research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Heat-InactivatedCells · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A review for non-antibiotic treatment ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. TheMicroorganisms · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. How Probiotics Affect the Microbiota.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2019
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sunit C SinghiDeptartment of Pediatrics, MM Institute of Medical Science and Research, Mullana, 133207, India.
Suresh KumarDepartment Of Pediatrics, Advanced Pediatrics Centre, Post graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, 160012, India.
Institute of Medical Sciences · INPost Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gut microflora contribute greatly to immune and nutritive functions and act as a physical barrier against pathogenic organisms across the gut mucosa. Critical illness disrupts the balance between host and gut microflora, facilitating colonization, overgrowth, and translocation of pathogens and microbial products across intestinal mucosal barrier and causing systemic inflammatory response syndrome and sepsis. Commonly used probiotics, which have been developed from organisms that form gut microbiota, singly or in combination, can restore gut microflora and offer the benefits similar to those offered by normal gut flora, namely immune enhancement, improved barrier function of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT), and prevention of bacterial translocation. Enteral supplementation of probiotic strains containing either Lactobacillus alone or in combination with Bifidobacterium reduced the incidence and severity of necrotizing enterocolitis and all-cause mortality in preterm infants. Orally administered Lactobacillus casei subspecies rhamnosus, Lactobacillus reuteri, and Lactobacillus rhamnosus were effective in the prevention of late-onset sepsis and GIT colonization by Candida in preterm very low birth weight infants. In critically ill children, probiotics are effective in the prevention and treatment of antibiotic-associated diarrhea. Oral administration of a mix of probiotics for 1 week to children on broad-spectrum antibiotics in a pediatric intensive care unit decreased GIT colonization by Candida, led to a 50% reduction in candiduria, and showed a trend toward decreased incidence of candidemia. However, routine use of probiotics cannot be supported on the basis of current scientific evidence. Safety of probiotics is also a concern; rarely, probiotics may cause bacteremia, fungemia, and sepsis in immunocompromised critically ill children. More studies are needed to answer questions on the effectiveness of a mix versus single-strain probiotics, optimum dosage regimens and duration of treatment, cost effectiveness, and risk-benefit potential for the prevention and treatment of various critical illnesses.

Indexed as

Antibiotic associated DiarrheaCandida colonizationcandidemiaCritical illnessCritically ill childrenNosocomial InfectionsProbioticsVentilator Associated Pneumonia

Identifiers

PMID27081478
PMCPMC4813632
OpenAlexW2314417925

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.