ArticleJournal of the science of food and agriculture2025
Exploring the anti-inflammatory effects of microencapsulated probiotic bacteria: in vivo and in vitro evaluation in healthy mouse models.
Article in Journal of the science of food and agriculture, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A review of biomaterials mediated probiotics delivery system in the field of inflammatory bowel disease treatment.Archives of microbiology · 2025Review
- Evaluation of Immunoprotective Activities of White Button Mushroom (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEncapsulation technology has been extensively employed in recent years to enhance the efficacy and efficiency of probiotics. Nevertheless, existing studies have primarily concentrated on product efficacy, with inadequate scrutiny concerning potential effects on living organisms. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of various encapsulated probiotic strains on inflammatory responses in healthy mice, alongside their in vitro viability. Nissle (EcN) and Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) were microencapsulated for the study.
resultsThe differences in serum levels of Total Oxidant Status, Total Antioxidant Status, and C-reactive protein among the groups were statistically significant (LGG, P = 0.039, P = 0.024, and P < 0.001; EcN, P = 0.019, P = 0.012, and P = 0.037, respectively). The highest levels were found in the control group, while the lowest levels were observed in the microencapsulated group. There were no significant differences in tissue tumor necrosis factor or interleukin-6 levels for either LGG or EcN.
conclusionProbiotics reduced inflammation-related parameters in serum of healthy mice. Microencapsulation preserved viability in vitro, but in vivo no significant differences were observed in anti-inflammatory parameters or body weight between microencapsulated and free probiotics. © 2025 The Author(s). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
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.