Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 567

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Impact on the composition of the faecal flora by a new probiotic preparation: preliminary data on maintenance treatment of patients with ulcerative colitis

Venturi, Gionchetti, Rizzello, Johansson, Zucconi, Brigidi, Matteuzzi, Campieri·1999·Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics

Abstract

Background: : Although 5‐aminosalicylic acid (5‐ASA) oral compounds are the standard maintenance treatment for ulcerative colitis in remission, some patients cannot use them because of side‐effects. Clinical and experimental observations have suggested the potential role of probiotics in inflammatory bowel disease therapy. Aim: : To evaluate the effects on intestinal microflora and the clinical efficacy of a new probiotic preparation in patients with ulcerative colitis in remission. Patients and methods: : Twenty patients with ulcerative colitis, intolerant or allergic to 5‐ASA, have been treated with a new probiotic preparation (VSL # 3, CSL, Milan, Italy) containing 5 × 10 11 cells/g of 3 strains of bifidobacteria, 4 strains of lactobacilli and 1 strain of Streptococcus salivarius ssp. thermophilus. Two doses of 3 g were administered o.d. for 12 months. Faecal samples for stool culture were obtained from the patients at the beginning of the trial and after 10, 20, 40, 60, 75, 90 days, 12 months and at 15 days after the end of the treatment. The following bacterial groups have been evaluated in the faeces: total aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, enterococci, Streptococcus thermophilus, lactobacilli, bifidobacteria, Bacteroides, clostridia, coliforms. Patients were assessed clinically every two months, and assessed endoscopically at 6 and 12 months or in relapse. Results: : Faecal concentrations of Streptococcus salivarius ssp. thermophilus, lactobacilli and bifidobacteria increased significantly in all patients, compared to their basal level, from the 20th day of treatment (P < 0.05) and remained stable throughout the study. Concentrations of Bacteroides, clostridia, coliforms, total aerobic and anaerobic bacteria did not change significantly during treatment (P = N.S.). Fifteen of 20 treated patients remained in remission during the study, one patient was lost to follow up, while the remaining relapsed. No significant side‐effects have been reported. Conclusions: : These results show that this probiotic preparation is able to colonize the intestine, and suggest that it may be useful in maintaining the remission in ulcerative colitis patients intolerant or allergic to 5‐ASA. Controlled trials are warranted to confirm these preliminary results.

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 · 10.1046/j.1365-2036.1999.00560.x

Cites

24 of 24 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 24 references

Cited by

See all 567

Metadata

Authors
Venturi, Gionchetti, Rizzello, Johansson, Zucconi, Brigidi, Matteuzzi, & Campieri
Venue
Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1999-08
Volume
13
Issue
8
Pages
1103-1108
ISSN
  • 0269-2813 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2036
OpenAlex
W2076837393
Cited by
567
References
24
FWCI
44.98
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impact on the composition of the faecal flora by a new probiotic preparation: preliminary data on maintenance treatment of patients with ulcerative colitis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2036.1999.00560.x
The paper
Venturi, Gionchetti, Rizzello, Johansson, Zucconi, Brigidi, Matteuzzi, & Campieri. (1999). Impact on the composition of the faecal flora by a new probiotic preparation: preliminary data on maintenance treatment of patients with ulcerative colitis. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2036.1999.00560.x

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.