Cited by 57Probiotics and Fermented FoodsGut microbiota and healthGastrointestinal motility and disorders

Efficacy of Bacillus probiotics in prevention of antibiotic‐associated diarrhoea: a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled clinical trial

Open access
Horosheva, Tatiana V., Vodyanoy, Vitaly, Sorokulova, Iryna·2014·JMM Case Reports

Abstract

Introduction: Antibiotic‐associated diarrhoea (AAD) is one of the most common side effects of antibiotic therapy. The main mechanism associated with the development of AAD is significant changes in the composition and quantity of the gut microbiota during the treatment with antibiotics. Probiotic bacteria have been shown to stabilize the gut microbiota and can be used to prevent diarrhoea associated with antibiotic therapy. Case presentation: We present the results of a single‐centre, randomized, double‐blinded, placebo‐controlled clinical trial. Patients were randomized into three groups: probiotic group 1 received a probiotic containing strains Bacillus subtilis 3 and Bacillus licheniformis 31; probiotic group 2 received a probiotic, containing B. subtilis 3; and the placebo group received an inert composition in vials, formulated to be indistinguishable from the vials with probiotics. Participants received one vial twice a day. Probiotic treatment significantly reduced incidents of AAD in the patients. Among 91 patients in group 1 treated with probiotic mix, nine developed AAD. In group 2, seven patients out of 90 who received only one probiotic strain developed AAD. A considerably higher incidence of AAD was registered in the placebo group – 23 from 90 patients (P<0.001 vs groups 1 and 2). Both probiotics demonstrated a significant effect in the prevention of nausea, bloating, vomiting and abdominal pain. Conclusion: Treatment with Bacillus probiotics during antibiotic therapy significantly decreased the incidence of AAD and adverse effects related to the use of antibiotics. Both probiotics were well tolerated by the patients without side effects. No significant difference was found in the efficacy of the two probiotics.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1099/jmmcr.0.004036

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

1 of the 21 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Horosheva, T. V., Vodyanoy, V., & Sorokulova, I.
Affiliations
  • Medical Center Vitbiomed OOO, Moscow, Russian Federation
  • Auburn University (US)
Venue
JMM Case Reports
Published
2014-09-01
Volume
1
Issue
3
ISSN
2053-3721 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2102563287
Cited by
57
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5
FWCI
3.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
JMM Case Reports (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal motility and disorders
Keywords
antibiotic-associated diarrhea, probiotics, Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus licheniformis, gut microbiota

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