Cited by 76Gastrointestinal motility and disordersProbiotics and Fermented FoodsInflammatory Bowel Disease

Effects of Bifidobacterium infantis 35624 on Post-Inflammatory Visceral Hypersensitivity in the Rat

Johnson, Anthony C., Greenwood-Van Meerveld, Beverley, McRorie, John·2011·Digestive Diseases and Sciences

Abstract

Background Irritable bowel syndrome patients have abnormal visceral perception. Probiotic organisms may produce beneficial effects in these patients by reducing visceral hypersensitivity.Aim To investigate the effects of the probiotic organism, Bifidobacterium infantis 35624, on post-inflammatory visceral hypersensitivity in rats.Methods Colitis was induced using intracolonic administration of trinitrobenzenesulfonic acid; control rats received saline (day 0). Myeloperoxidase (MPO) levels and colonic damage scores were determined. From days 15-29, rats (n = 10/group) rats were orally dosed with 2 ml of B. infantis ≥ 10(8) colony-forming units/ml or vehicle (MRS broth). A second series of rats (n = 10/group) was dosed in the same manner from days 15-59. The level of colonic stimulation during colorectal distension (CRD) was determined by recording a visceromotor response (VMR) to CRD at 30 mmHg pre- and post-treatment. Post-treatment samples of colonic tissue were weighed, graded for morphologic damage, and assayed for MPO levels.Results All rats were hypersensitive at day 15. On day 30, hypersensitivity to colorectal distension remained in the vehicle group, but was significantly reduced in the B. infantis group (mean VMR/10 min: vehicle = 15.4 ± 1.0 vs. B. infantis = 7.6 ± 1.0, p < 0.001). A similar, significant effect was observed at day 60. On both day 30 and day 60, tissue weight, colonic damage scores, and MPO levels resembled those of control animals.Conclusions Oral administration of Bifidobacterium infantis 35624 normalized sensitivity to colorectal distension in a rat model of post-inflammatory colonic hypersensitivity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10620-011-1730-y

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Johnson, A. C., Greenwood-Van Meerveld, B., & McRorie, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center (US)
  • Procter & Gamble (United States) (US)
Venue
Digestive Diseases and Sciences
Published
2011-05-12
Volume
56
Issue
11
Pages
3179-3186
ISSN
  • 0163-2116 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2568
OpenAlex
W1966691836
Cited by
76
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
6.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Digestive Diseases and Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Procter and Gamble
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Keywords
probiotics, visceral hypersensitivity, irritable bowel syndrome, colorectal distension, visceromotor response, myeloperoxidase, colonic inflammation, gut-brain axis
MeSH terms
Animals, Bifidobacterium, Intestinal Mucosa, Male, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Probiotics, Irritable Bowel Syndrome, Rats, Nociception, Visceral Pain

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