Trial reportFrontiers in immunology2022
Improvement Effect of
Trial report in Frontiers in immunology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perioperative administration of CBM588 in colorectal cancer radical surgery: A single-center, randomized controlled trial.Cell reports. Medicine · 2025Trial
- Therapeutic Evaluation ofNutrients · 2024Trial
- Trial
- Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis and Enterococcus hirae Enhance Immunity by Modulating Gut Microbiota and Metabolic Pathways in Immunosuppressed Mice.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Article
- Microencapsulated Quercetin and Bifidobacterium animalis Independently Preserve Jejunal Enteric Neurons During Colorectal Carcinogenesis.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2026Article
- Impact of gut microbiome on outcomes following endoscopic interventions in gastrointestinal disease.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- Alteration in gut microbiota after colonoscopy: proposed mechanisms and the role of probiotic interventions.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Review
- Gut microbiota dysbiosis impairs TGF-β/Smad4 signaling to drive postoperative metastasis in colorectal cancer.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Postoperative symptoms, bowel dysfunction and recurrence are common problems after resection of colorectal polyps. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of Methods: In this single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥ 18 years) undergoing endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps were treated with probiotics ( Results: A total of 100 individuals were included (48 in probiotic group and 52 in placebo group). No difference was seen in the mean scores between the two groups (0.29 vs. 0.43, P = 0.246). Colorectal polyps size (P = 0.008) and preoperative symptoms (P = 0.032) were influential factors for the primary endpoint. Besides, MH-02 alleviated difficult defecation (P = 0.045), and reduced the time to recovery of bowel function (P = 0.032). High-throughput analysis showed that MH-02 can help restore the diversity of intestinal microbiota, and increased the relative abundance of Conclusion: In this prospective trial, MH-02 showed efficacy in patients with resection of colorectal polyps, particularly in the recovery of bowel function, and the changes in the intestinal microbiota may provide evidence for further exploration of the therapeutic mechanisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.