Harris Rebecca G, Neale Elizabeth P, Batterham Marijka
School of Medical Indigenous and Health Science, Faculty of Science, Medicine, and Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales 2522, Australia.
Illawarra Health and Medical Research Institute, Wollongong, New South Wales 2522, Australia.
Nutr Rev. 2025 Jun 1;83(6):1006-1034. doi: 10.1093/nutrit/nuae119.
There has been an increase in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing probiotics with various maintenance therapies, such as polyethylene glycol, lactulose, and mineral oil, to treat functional constipation in children.
The aim was to compare probiotics with all other oral maintenance therapies for functional constipation in children and rank all treatments in terms of effectiveness in a network meta-analysis.
RCTs were identified through systematically searching the MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, trial registries, and forward and backward citation searching. Within-study risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool, and confidence in the estimates was assessed using the CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis) framework. Random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted.
Data were pooled from 41 and 29 RCTs for network meta-analysis of defecation frequency and treatment success, respectively. Probiotics did not significantly increase the number of bowel movements per week when compared with any conventional treatment or placebo. A combination of mineral oil and probiotics was the most effective treatment for increasing defecation frequency (mean difference: 3.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64, 5.63). The most effective treatments for increasing the risk of treatment success as compared with placebo were mineral oil (relative risk [RR]: 2.41; 95% CI: 1.53, 3.81) and a combined treatment of polyethylene glycol and lactulose (RR: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.21, 4.97). Confidence in the estimates ranged from very low to moderate.
Currently, there is no evidence to suggest that probiotics should be used as a standalone treatment for functional constipation in children. More high-quality studies are needed to evaluate different strains of probiotics and their potential benefit as an additional treatment component to conventional treatments. Mineral oil and polyethylene glycol were the most effective treatments to increase defecation frequency and treatment success rates and should remain the first line of treatment for children with functional constipation.
PROSPERO registration no.
CRD42022360977 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=360977).
比较益生菌与各种维持疗法(如聚乙二醇、乳果糖和矿物油)治疗儿童功能性便秘的随机对照试验(RCT)有所增加。
旨在比较益生菌与其他所有用于儿童功能性便秘的口服维持疗法,并在网络荟萃分析中根据有效性对所有治疗方法进行排名。
通过系统检索MEDLINE、Scopus、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆数据库、试验注册库以及向前和向后引文检索来识别随机对照试验。使用Cochrane偏倚风险2工具评估研究内偏倚风险,并使用CINeMA(网络荟萃分析置信度)框架评估估计值的置信度。进行随机效应网络荟萃分析。
分别从41项和29项随机对照试验中汇总数据,用于排便频率和治疗成功率的网络荟萃分析。与任何传统治疗或安慰剂相比,益生菌并未显著增加每周的排便次数。矿物油和益生菌联合使用是增加排便频率最有效的治疗方法(平均差异:3.13;95%置信区间[CI]:0.64,5.63)。与安慰剂相比,增加治疗成功风险最有效的治疗方法是矿物油(相对风险[RR]:2.41;95%CI:1.53,3.81)以及聚乙二醇和乳果糖联合治疗(RR:2.45;95%CI:1.21,4.97)。估计值的置信度范围从非常低到中等。
目前,没有证据表明益生菌应用作儿童功能性便秘的单一治疗方法。需要更多高质量研究来评估不同菌株的益生菌及其作为传统治疗附加治疗成分的潜在益处。矿物油和聚乙二醇是增加排便频率和治疗成功率最有效的治疗方法,应仍然是儿童功能性便秘的一线治疗方法。
PROSPERO注册号
CRD42022360977(https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=360977)