改善肥胖者肠道屏障的益生菌/元,未显示出协同作用
  • 一项随机双盲安慰剂对照临床试验,在114例肥胖受试者中检验低聚半乳糖(GOS)、青春双岐杆菌IVS-1和乳双歧杆菌BB-12,分别或作为合生制剂服用3周的效果;
  • 受试者粪便中检出的IVS-1显著高于BB-12,IVS-1增加双歧杆菌总量的作用与GOS相似;
  • 两株益生菌和GOS分别都可改善受试者结肠通透性,但未显著改变受试者的内毒素血症标志物;
  • 两株益生菌分别与GOS作为合生制剂使用时,其促双歧杆菌和改善结肠通透性的效果,未展现出协同作用。
主编推荐语
mildbreeze
Microbiome近期发表一项临床试验,发现在肥胖受试者中,两株益生菌和益生元低聚半乳糖分别使用时,均可增加肠道菌群中双歧杆菌总量、改善肠道通透性,但当作为合生制剂使用时未展现出额外的增强效果。
关键字
延伸阅读本研究的原文信息和链接出处,以及相关解读和评论文章。欢迎读者朋友们推荐!
图片
Microbiome [IF:11.607]

Probiotic Bifidobacterium strains and galactooligosaccharides improve intestinal barrier function in obese adults but show no synergism when used together as synbiotics

双歧杆菌益生菌株和低聚半乳糖改善肥胖成年人的肠道屏障功能但作为合生制剂共同使用时没表现出协同作用

10.1186/s40168-018-0494-4

2018-06-28, Article

Abstract & Authors:展开

Abstract:收起
Background: One way to improve both the ecological performance and functionality of probiotic bacteria is by combining them with a prebiotic in the form of a synbiotic. However, the degree to which such synbiotic formulations improve probiotic strain functionality in humans has not been tested systematically. Our goal was to use a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-arm clinical trial in obese humans to compare the ecological and physiological impact of the prebiotic galactooligosaccharides (GOS) and the probiotic strains Bifidobacterium adolescentis IVS-1 (autochthonous and selected via in vivo selection) and Bifidobacterium lactis BB-12 (commercial probiotic allochthonous to the human gut) when used on their own or as synbiotic combinations. After 3 weeks of consumption, strain-specific quantitative real-time PCR and 16S rRNA gene sequencing were performed on fecal samples to assess changes in the microbiota. Intestinal permeability was determined by measuring sugar recovery in urine by GC after consumption of a sugar mixture. Serum-based endotoxin exposure was also assessed.
Results: IVS-1 reached significantly higher cell numbers in fecal samples than BB-12 (P < 0.01) and, remarkably, its administration induced an increase in total bifidobacteria that was comparable to that of GOS. Although GOS showed a clear bifidogenic effect on the resident gut microbiota, both probiotic strains showed only a non-significant trend of higher fecal cell numbers when administered with GOS. Post-aspirin sucralose:lactulose ratios were reduced in groups IVS-1 (P = 0.050), IVS-1 + GOS (P = 0.022), and GOS (P = 0.010), while sucralose excretion was reduced with BB-12 (P = 0.002) and GOS (P = 0.020), indicating improvements in colonic permeability but no synergistic effects. No changes in markers of endotoxemia were observed.
Conclusion: This study demonstrated that “autochthony” of the probiotic strain has a larger effect on ecological performance than the provision of a prebiotic substrate, likely due to competitive interactions with members of the resident microbiota. Although the synbiotic combinations tested in this study did not demonstrate functional synergism, our findings clearly showed that the pro- and prebiotic components by themselves improved markers of colonic permeability, providing a rational for their use in pathologies with an underlying leakiness of the gut.

First Authors:
Janina Krumbeck

Correspondence Authors:
Robert W Hutkins,Ali Keshavarzian,Jens Walter

All Authors:
Janina Krumbeck,Heather E Rasmussen,Robert W Hutkins,Jennifer Clarke,Krista Shawron,Ali Keshavarzian,Jens Walter

评论