Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38806862›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2024

Efficacy and acceptability of different probiotic products plus laxatives for pediatric functional constipation: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Wei-Chieh Yang, Bing-Syuan Zeng, Chih-Sung Liang, Chih-Wei Hsu, Kuan-Pin Su, Yi-Cheng Wu, Yu-Kang Tu, Pao-Yen Lin, Brendon Stubbs, Tien-Yu Chen and 7 more

Abstract readNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. 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

17 authors.

Wei-Chieh Yang *Department of Pediatrics, Ping An Medical Clinic, Tainan, Taiwan.
Bing-Syuan Zeng *Department of Internal Medicine, E-Da Cancer Hospital, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Chih-Sung Liang *Department of Psychiatry, Beitou Branch, Tri-Service General Hospital; School of Medicine, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chih-Wei HsuDepartment of Psychiatry, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Kuan-Pin SuMind-Body Interface Research Center (MBI-Lab), China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan.
Yi-Cheng WuDepartment of Sports Medicine, Landseed International Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Yu-Kang TuInstitute of Health Data Analytics & Statistics, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Pao-Yen LinDepartment of Psychiatry, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Brendon StubbsDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Tien-Yu ChenDepartment of Psychiatry, Tri-Service General Hospital, School of Medicine, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan.
Yen-Wen ChenProspect Clinic for Otorhinolaryngology & Neurology, No. 252, Nanzixin Road, Nanzi District, Kaohsiung City, 81166, Taiwan.
Yow-Ling ShiueInstitute of Biomedical Sciences, National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Bing-Yan ZengDepartment of Internal Medicine, E-Da Dachang Hospital, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Mein-Woei Suen *Department of Psychology, College of Medical and Health Science, Asia University, 500, Lioufeng Rd., Wufeng, Taichung, 41354, Taiwan. blake@asia.edu.tw.
Chao-Ming Hung *Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, E-Da Cancer Hospital, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. ed100647@edah.org.tw.
Ming-Kung Wu *Department of Psychiatry, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. mingkung180@gmail.com.
Ping-Tao Tseng *Department of Psychology, College of Medical and Health Science, Asia University, 500, Lioufeng Rd., Wufeng, Taichung, 41354, Taiwan. ducktseng@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5761-7800

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The prevalence of pediatric constipation ranges from 0.7 to 29.6% across different countries. Functional constipation accounts for 95% of pediatric constipation, and the efficacy of pharmacotherapy is limited, with a success rate of 60%. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown the benefits of probiotic supplements in treating this condition. However, the reported strains of probiotics varied among the RCTs. We aimed to compare the efficacy and acceptability of different probiotic supplements for pediatric functional constipation. The current frequentist model-based network meta-analysis (NMA) included RCTs of probiotic supplements for functional constipation in children. The primary outcome was changes in bowel movement or stool frequency; acceptability outcome was all-cause discontinuation. Nine RCTs were included (N = 710; mean age = 5.5 years; 49.4% girls). Most probiotic products, used either alone or combined with laxatives, were associated with significantly better improvement in bowel movement or stool frequency than placebo/control. Protexin plus laxatives (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.87, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 0.85 to 2.90) were associated with the greatest improvement in bowel movement or stool frequency among all the investigated probiotic products. For the single probiotic interventions, only Lactobacillus casei rhamnosus Lcr35 was associated with significant efficacy compared to placebo/control treatments (SMD = 1.37, 95% CI: 0.32 to 2.43). All the investigated probiotic products had fecal incontinence and patient drop-out rates similar to those of placebo/control treatments.  Conclusion: The results of our NMA support the application of an advanced combination of probiotics and laxatives for pediatric functional constipation if there is no concurrent contraindication.  Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42022298724). What is Known: • Despite of the high prevalence of pediatric constipation, which ranges from 0.7% to 29.6%, the efficacy of pharmacotherapy is limited, with a success rate of 60%. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown the benefits of probiotic supplements in treating this condition. However, the reported strains of probiotics varied among the RCTs. The widely heterogeneous strains of probiotics let the traditional meta-analysis, which pooled all different strains into one group, be nonsense and insignificant. What is New: • By conducting a comprehensive network meta-analysis, we aimed to compare the efficacy and acceptability of different strains of probiotic supplements for pediatric functional constipation. Network meta-analysis of nine randomized controlled trials revealed that the most probiotic products, used either alone or combined with laxatives, were associated with significantly better improvement in bowel movement or stool frequency than placebo/control. Protexin plus laxatives was associated with the greatest improvement in bowel movement or stool frequency among all the investigated probiotic products. For the single probiotic interventions, only Lactobacillus casei rhamnosus Lcr35 was associated with significant efficacy compared to placebo/control treatments. All the investigated probiotic products had fecal incontinence and patient drop-out rates similar to those of placebo/control treatments.

Indexed as

ConstipationLaxativesProbioticsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMalePatient Acceptance of Health CareTreatment OutcomeLaxativesConstipationFamily medicineNetwork meta-analysisPediatricsProbiotics

Identifiers

PMID38806862
PMCPMC11263257

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.