ReviewMicrosystems & nanoengineering2026
Extremely oxygen-sensitive next-generation probiotics: can current microcomposite formulations ensure effective colonic delivery?
Review in Microsystems & nanoengineering, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Short-Chain Fatty Acids at the Crossroads of Microbiota, Immunometabolism, and Inflammation.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Stress physiology and matrix-mediated delivery of probiotic microorganisms: translational challenges and strategies for industrial biomanufacturing.Archives of microbiology · 2026Review
- Technological Innovation and Consumer Trust: Understanding Safety Perceptions in Next Generation Probiotic Development.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Encapsulation in Calcium Alginate Beads Regulates Growth, Release and Viability of Probiotic Bacteria Through Protective Microenvironments.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
This narrative review evaluates the suitability of conventional biopolymer-based microencapsulation strategies, originally developed for facultative and aerotolerant probiotics, for the protection and delivery of extremely oxygen-sensitive (EOS) next-generation probiotics (NGPs). With increasing interest in NGPs, there is a pressing need to establish whether conventional formulation approaches can be effectively translated for these highly oxygen-sensitive bioactives. We reviewed commonly used microencapsulation materials and techniques, assessing their suitability and potential to preserve EOS bacterial viability. Hydrated pectin- and gellan-based microcomposite systems, particularly when combined with xanthan gum or other polymers, exhibited the strongest oxygen-protection performance. In contrast, alginate alone demonstrated inconsistent barrier properties, though its performance improved when blended or coated with chitosan. Dehydrated microcomposite systems did not yield additional viability benefits compared to their hydrated counterparts. Importantly, none of the studies explicitly quantified oxygen exposure parameters or established threshold levels required for effective protection of EOS strains. Despite some microcomposite systems demonstrating potential for EOS colonic delivery, our findings highlight a critical gap in formulation science for these sensitive bioactives and underscore the need for the development of bespoke, tailored delivery systems that advance beyond conventional approaches designed for facultative or aerotolerant strains. Addressing these gaps will support the advancement of microencapsulation technologies, improve biotherapeutic NGP formulation, and ultimately facilitate the translation of exploratory clinical findings into rationally designed, accessible, and effective microbiome-based interventions.
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.