ArticleInternational microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology2026
Antibacterial and antibiofilm effects of synbiotics against multidrug-resistant bacteria: Acinetobacter baumannii and Enterococcus faecalis.
Article in International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Microbial Community Associations With Listeria monocytogenes in Food Processing Environments: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2025Pooled it
- Prevalence of biofilm producing Acinetobacter baumannii clinical isolates: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- Isolation and Identification of Effective Probiotics on Drug-ResistantThe Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAntibiotic resistance has become a massive public health threat that requires novel and effective antibacterial and antibiofilm alternatives. The use of probiotics is interested to prevent and control certain infections. Acinetobacter baumannii and Enterocoocus faecalis increase their resistance against antibiotic by producing biofilm and the objective of this study was to investigate the antibacterial and antibiofilm property of probiotics and synbiotics against multidrug-resistant A. baumannii and E. faecalis.
methodsThe antimicrobial and the antibiofilm activities of cell- free supernatants of four strains of Lactobacillus against 20 clinical multi-drug resistant (MDR) isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii and Enterocoocus faecalis were determined in the presence of 0.3% of sorbitol, raffinose, citrate, trehalose, inulin, and riboflavin using well diffusion agar and micro-dilution method.
resultsThe cell- free supernatant of L. rhamnosus with citrate and trehalose showed the best antibacterial activity against MDR A. baumannii (28.8 ± 2.1 mm, 1.128 µL/mL), and L. rhamnosus with all of prebiotics against MDR E. faecalis (29.8 ± 0 mm, 1.128 µL/mL) compare to probiotic alone. The prebiotics could improve the inhibitory effect of probiotics against the Gram-negative A. baumannii higher than Gram-positive E. faecalis. Biofilm formation was reduced for both pathogens in presence of probiotics and synbiotics. L. plantarum with riboflavin and L. rhamnosus with or without inulin potently inhibits biofilm formation in E. faecalis (50 ± 0.86%) and A. baumannii (75 ± 6.5%), respectively.
conclusionsThe results of current study support the antibiofilm activity of synbiotics, and suggest their use as suitable adjuvants as well as biocontrol agents for treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41490950What 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.