Manipulation of the microbiome in critical illness—probiotics as a preventive measure against ventilator-associated pneumonia
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the possible modes of action of probiotics and provide a systematic review of the current evidence on the efficacy of probiotics to prevent ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) in critically ill patients. METHODS: We conducted an unrestricted search of the English language medical literature. For each individual study, the relative risk of VAP was calculated using the reported primary outcome data. RESULTS: The search identified a total of 72 articles. Eight articles enrolling a total of 1229 patients fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. In four trials, the investigators were blinded for the intervention, and two trials used an intention-to-treat analysis. Loss to follow-up with regard to the primary endpoint ranged from 0 to 14% in the intervention groups and from 0 to 16% in the control groups. The incidence of VAP expressed as the percentage of studied patients was reported in seven trials. The incidence of VAP ranged from 4 to 36% in the intervention groups and from 13 to 50% in the control groups. The relative risk for VAP ranged between 0.30 and 1.41. Three trials showed a significant difference in favor of probiotic therapy between the intervention and the control groups. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of VAP tended to be lower in patients treated with probiotics in most trials identified by the systematic search. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies and the low quality of evidence, it remains difficult to draw firm conclusions. The efficacy of preventive probiotics should be studied in more detail in future trials. Application of probiotics for the prevention of VAP seems to be safe with only few side effects reported in the selected trials.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
Recent reviews have concluded that the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia was safely reduced in patients taking probiotics.
“Recent reviews have concluded that the incidence of ventilator associated pneumonia (VAP - defined as an infectious inflammatory reaction of the lung that occurs after mechanical ventilation for >48 h) was safely reduced in patients taking probiotics (van Ruissen et al., 2019; Su M. et al., 2020).”
From Viral Infections, the Microbiome, and Probiotics (2021) · cites this paper as van Ruissen et al., 2019
Understanding the dynamics of the relationship between hospital intensive care and the microbiome opens novel treatment avenues with the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality of these patients.
“Understanding the dynamics of this relationship opens novel treatment avenues with the potential to reduce the morbidity and mortality of these patients (van Ruissen et al., 2019; Su M. et al., 2020).”
From Viral Infections, the Microbiome, and Probiotics (2021) · cites this paper as van Ruissen et al., 2019
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 45 · Cited by 23
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [1]Suetens C (2012) Point prevalence survey of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial use in European acute care hospitals. ECDC Eurosurveillance Rep. 10.2900/86011 · DOI
- Authors
- van Ruissen, M. C. E., Bos, L. D., Dickson, R. P., Dondorp, A. M., Schultsz, C., & Schultz, M. J.
- Affiliations
- Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
- University of Michigan (US)
- Mahidol University (TH)
- Corresponding author
- Bos, Lieuwe D.
- Venue
- Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
- Published
- 2019-07
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- S1
- Pages
- 37-37
- ISSN
- 2197-425X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6658628
- OpenAlex
- W2962702868
- Cited by
- 23
- References
- 45
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6
- FWCI
- 0.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Intensive Care Medicine Experimental (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (K23HL130641)
- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R21AI137669)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Nosocomial Infections in ICU
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
- Keywords
- probiotics, ventilator-associated pneumonia, microbiome, critical illness, pneumonia prevention, intensive care unit patients, probiotic safety, relative risk
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