In vivo effectiveness and safety of probiotics on prophylaxis and treatment of oral candidiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Background To systematically review and assess the in vivo effectiveness and safety of probiotics for prophylaxis and treating oral candidiasis. Methods A literature search for studies published in English until August 1, 2018 was conducted in the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochra...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lijun Hu, Mimi Zhou, Andrew Young, Weiwei Zhao, Zhimin Yan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2019-07-01
Series:BMC Oral Health
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12903-019-0841-2
id doaj-120fcae193f04c468e2f3d2f44c67ec9
record_format Article
spelling doaj-120fcae193f04c468e2f3d2f44c67ec92020-11-25T03:01:03ZengBMCBMC Oral Health1472-68312019-07-0119111210.1186/s12903-019-0841-2In vivo effectiveness and safety of probiotics on prophylaxis and treatment of oral candidiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysisLijun Hu0Mimi Zhou1Andrew Young2Weiwei Zhao3Zhimin Yan4Department of Oral Medicine, Peking University School and Hospital of StomatologyDepartment of Oral Medicine, Peking University School and Hospital of StomatologyDepartment of Diagnostic Sciences, Arthur A. Dugoni School of Dentistry, University of the PacificDepartment of Oral Medicine, Peking University School and Hospital of StomatologyDepartment of Oral Medicine, Peking University School and Hospital of StomatologyAbstract Background To systematically review and assess the in vivo effectiveness and safety of probiotics for prophylaxis and treating oral candidiasis. Methods A literature search for studies published in English until August 1, 2018 was conducted in the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Randomized controlled clinical trials and experimental mouse animal model studies comparing probiotics (at any dosage and in any form) with control groups (placebo, blank control or other agents) and reporting outcomes of the prophylactic and therapeutic effects were considered for inclusion. A descriptive study and, potentially, a meta-analysis were planned. Results Six randomized controlled clinical trials and 5 controlled experiments of mouse animal models were included in the systematic review. Four randomized controlled clinical trials comparing a probiotics group with a placebo/blank control group in 480 elderly and denture wearers were included in the meta-analysis. The overall combined odds ratio of the (random effects) meta-analysis was 0.24 (95% CI =0.09–0.63, P < 0.01). The overall combined odds ratio of the (fixed effects) sensitivity analysis was 0.39 (95% CI =0.25–0.60, P < 0.01) by excluding a study with the smallest sample size. These analyses showed that there was a statistically significant difference in the effect of probiotics compared with the control groups in elderly and denture wearers. The remaining 2 studies compared probiotics with other agents in a population aged 18–75 years and children aged 6–14 years respectively, and were analyzed descriptively. Meta-analysis and descriptive analyses indicated that probiotics were potentially effective in reducing morbidity, improving clinical symptoms and reducing oral Candida counts in oral candidiasis. The biases of the included studies were low or uncertain. The relatively common complaints reported were gastrointestinal discomfort and unpleasant taste, and no severe adverse events were reported. Conclusions Probiotics were superior to the placebo and blank control in preventing and treating oral candidiasis in the elderly and denture wearers. Although probiotics showed a favorable effect in treating oral candidiasis, more evidence is required to warrant their effectiveness when compared with conventional antifungal treatments. Moreover, data on the safety of probiotics are still insufficient, and further research is needed.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12903-019-0841-2Oral candidiasisProbioticsEffectivenessSafetyClinical trialMouse animal model
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Lijun Hu
Mimi Zhou
Andrew Young
Weiwei Zhao
Zhimin Yan
spellingShingle Lijun Hu
Mimi Zhou
Andrew Young
Weiwei Zhao
Zhimin Yan
In vivo effectiveness and safety of probiotics on prophylaxis and treatment of oral candidiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BMC Oral Health
Oral candidiasis
Probiotics
Effectiveness
Safety
Clinical trial
Mouse animal model
author_facet Lijun Hu
Mimi Zhou
Andrew Young
Weiwei Zhao
Zhimin Yan
author_sort Lijun Hu
title In vivo effectiveness and safety of probiotics on prophylaxis and treatment of oral candidiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short In vivo effectiveness and safety of probiotics on prophylaxis and treatment of oral candidiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full In vivo effectiveness and safety of probiotics on prophylaxis and treatment of oral candidiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr In vivo effectiveness and safety of probiotics on prophylaxis and treatment of oral candidiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed In vivo effectiveness and safety of probiotics on prophylaxis and treatment of oral candidiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort in vivo effectiveness and safety of probiotics on prophylaxis and treatment of oral candidiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
publisher BMC
series BMC Oral Health
issn 1472-6831
publishDate 2019-07-01
description Abstract Background To systematically review and assess the in vivo effectiveness and safety of probiotics for prophylaxis and treating oral candidiasis. Methods A literature search for studies published in English until August 1, 2018 was conducted in the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Randomized controlled clinical trials and experimental mouse animal model studies comparing probiotics (at any dosage and in any form) with control groups (placebo, blank control or other agents) and reporting outcomes of the prophylactic and therapeutic effects were considered for inclusion. A descriptive study and, potentially, a meta-analysis were planned. Results Six randomized controlled clinical trials and 5 controlled experiments of mouse animal models were included in the systematic review. Four randomized controlled clinical trials comparing a probiotics group with a placebo/blank control group in 480 elderly and denture wearers were included in the meta-analysis. The overall combined odds ratio of the (random effects) meta-analysis was 0.24 (95% CI =0.09–0.63, P < 0.01). The overall combined odds ratio of the (fixed effects) sensitivity analysis was 0.39 (95% CI =0.25–0.60, P < 0.01) by excluding a study with the smallest sample size. These analyses showed that there was a statistically significant difference in the effect of probiotics compared with the control groups in elderly and denture wearers. The remaining 2 studies compared probiotics with other agents in a population aged 18–75 years and children aged 6–14 years respectively, and were analyzed descriptively. Meta-analysis and descriptive analyses indicated that probiotics were potentially effective in reducing morbidity, improving clinical symptoms and reducing oral Candida counts in oral candidiasis. The biases of the included studies were low or uncertain. The relatively common complaints reported were gastrointestinal discomfort and unpleasant taste, and no severe adverse events were reported. Conclusions Probiotics were superior to the placebo and blank control in preventing and treating oral candidiasis in the elderly and denture wearers. Although probiotics showed a favorable effect in treating oral candidiasis, more evidence is required to warrant their effectiveness when compared with conventional antifungal treatments. Moreover, data on the safety of probiotics are still insufficient, and further research is needed.
topic Oral candidiasis
Probiotics
Effectiveness
Safety
Clinical trial
Mouse animal model
url http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12903-019-0841-2
work_keys_str_mv AT lijunhu invivoeffectivenessandsafetyofprobioticsonprophylaxisandtreatmentoforalcandidiasisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mimizhou invivoeffectivenessandsafetyofprobioticsonprophylaxisandtreatmentoforalcandidiasisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT andrewyoung invivoeffectivenessandsafetyofprobioticsonprophylaxisandtreatmentoforalcandidiasisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT weiweizhao invivoeffectivenessandsafetyofprobioticsonprophylaxisandtreatmentoforalcandidiasisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT zhiminyan invivoeffectivenessandsafetyofprobioticsonprophylaxisandtreatmentoforalcandidiasisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
_version_ 1724695236451500032