Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38761281›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of nutrition2024

Saccharomyces boulardii improves clinical and paraclinical indices in overweight/obese knee osteoarthritis patients: a randomized triple-blind placebo-controlled trial.

Neda Dolatkhah, Alireza Jafari, Fariba Eslamian, Vahideh Toopchizadeh, Parviz Saleh, Maryam Hashemian

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. The gut-joint axis in osteoarthritis.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2026
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. 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

6 authors.

Neda DolatkhahPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran. neda_dolatkhah@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1358-1003
Alireza JafariDepartment pf Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-6257-6994
Fariba EslamianPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6313-9275
Vahideh ToopchizadehPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8177-1127
Parviz SalehKidney Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6179-2935
Maryam HashemianDepartment of Biology, School of Arts and Sciences, Utica University, Utica, NY, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9702-9752

Funding

Tabriz University of Medical Sciences 62858
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to determine the effect of the probiotic Saccharomyces boulardii (S. boulardii) in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

methodsIn this study, 70 patients with KOA were recruited via outpatient clinics between 2020 and 2021 and randomly assigned to receive probiotics or placebo supplements for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was a change in pain intensity according to the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score.

resultsSixty-three patients completed the trial. A linear mixed analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model analysis showed that probiotic was better than placebo in decreasing the pain intensity measured by visual analogue scale (VAS) [-2.11 (-2.59, -1.62) in probiotic group and -0.90 (-1.32, -0.48) in placebo group, p = 0.002] and WOMAC pain score [-3.57 (-4.66, -2.49) in probiotic group and -1.43 (-2.33, -0.53) in placebo group, p < 0.001]. The daily intake of acetaminophen for pain management significantly decreased in the probiotic group [-267.18 (-400.47, -133.89) mg, p < 0.001] that was significantly better than placebo (p = 0.006). Probiotic significantly decreased the serum levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) inflammatory index [-2.72 (-3.24, -2.20) µg/ml] and malondialdehyde (MDA) oxidative stress index [-1.61 (-2.11, -1.11) nmol/ml] compared to the placebo (p = 0.002 and p < 0.001, respectively). Probiotic was better than placebo in increasing the scores of role disorder due to physical health (p = 0.023), pain (p = 0.048) and physical health (p = 0.031).

conclusionProbiotic S. boulardii supplementation in patients with KOA significantly improved pain intensity, some dimensions of QoL, and inflammatory and oxidative stress biomarkers with no severe side effects. TRIAL REGISTRY: Registered on the Iranian clinical trial website ( http://www.irct.ir : IRCT20161022030424N4) on 2019-09-02.

Indexed as

Osteoarthritis, KneeProbioticsSaccharomyces boulardiiAgedDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedObesityOverweightPain MeasurementTreatment OutcomeOsteoarthritisProbioticS. boulardiiVisual analogue scaleWestern Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)

Identifiers

PMID38761281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.