Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 295

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Multicenter randomized-controlled clinical trial of probiotics (Lactobacillus johnsonii, LA1) on early endoscopic recurrence of Crohnʼs disease after ileo-caecal resection

Van Gossum, Andre, Dewit, Olivier, Louis, Edouard, de Hertogh, Geert, Baert, Filip, Fontaine, Fernand, DeVos, Martine, Enslen, Marc, Paintin, Marc, Franchimont, Denis·2007·Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Seventy percent of Crohn's disease (CD) patients exhibit anastomotic recurrence within 1 year after ileo-caecal surgery. Recent clinical trials suggest the beneficial use of probiotics in the control of intestinal inflammation in pouchitis and ulcerative colitis. This study is a multicenter clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of an oral administration of the probiotic LAl on early post-operative endoscopic recurrence of CD. METHODS: Seventy patients with CD were enrolled prior to elective ileo-caecal resection and randomly assigned after surgery to daily treatment with either Lactobacillus johnsonii, LA1, Nestle (1010 colony-forming units, CFU) (group A, n = 34) or placebo (group B, n = 36) for 12 weeks. The primary objective was to assess the effect of LAl on the endoscopic recurrence rate at 12 weeks. Stratification was performed according to smoking status at randomization. RESULTS: Seven and 14 patients were excluded in the LA1 and placebo groups, respectively. In intention-to-treat analysis, the mean endoscopic score was not significantly different between the two treatment groups at 3 months (LA1 versus placebo: 1.50 +/- 1.32 versus 1.22+/-1.37, treatment effect: P = 0.48, smoke effect: P = 0.72). The percentage of patients with severe recurrence (i3 + i4) was 21% and 15% in the LAl and placebo groups, respectively (P = 0.33). Using a per-protocol (PP) analysis, the mean endoscopic score was not significantly different between the two treatment groups (LAl versus placebo groups: 1.44 +/-1.31 versus 1.05 +/- 1.21, P = 0.32). The percentage of patients with severe recurrence (i3 + i4) was 19% and 9% in the LAl and placebo groups, respectively (P = 0.054). Clinical relapse rate (CDAI [CD activity index] > 150, with an increase of CDAI > 70 points or greater from baseline) in the LAl and placebo groups was 15% (4/27) and 13.5% (3/22), respectively (PP analysis: chi-square test, P = 0.91 and log-rank test: P = 0.79). CONCLUSION: Oral administration of the probiotic LA1 in patients with CD failed to prevent early endoscopic recurrence at 12 weeks after ileo-caecal resection.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ibd.20063

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Van Gossum, A., Dewit, O., Louis, E., de Hertogh, G., Baert, F., Fontaine, F., DeVos, M., Enslen, M., Paintin, M., & Franchimont, D.
Venue
Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
Published
2007-02
Volume
13
Issue
2
Pages
135-142
ISSN
1078-0998 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2001113033
Cited by
295
References
3
FWCI
10.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.