| |
Stéphane M
Schneider, Jérôme Filippi, Xavier Hébuterne, Gustavo Calle
Hinojosa, Patrick Rampal, Department of Hepato-Gastroenterology
and Clinical Nutrition, Archet University Hospital, Nice, France
Fernand Girard-Pipau, Anne Pompei, Bacteriology Laboratory,
Archet University Hospital, Nice, Franc
Dominique Moyse, Biostatistician, Paris, France
Gustavo Calle Hinojosa, Patrick Rampal, Department of
Hepato-Gastroenterology, Princess Grace Hospital, Monte-Carlo,
Monaco
Supported by a research grant from Laboratoires Biocodex,
Montrouge, France, EU
Correspondence to: Dr. Stéphane M Schneider,
Department of Gastroenterology and Clinical Nutrition, Archet
University Hospital, BP 3079, F-06202 Nice Cedex 3, France. stephane.schneider@unice.fr
Telephone: +33-4-92-03-61-68 Fax: +33-4-92-03-65-75
Received: 2005-01-12 Accepted: 2005-06-02
Abstract
Aim: To assess the effects
of Sb on fecal flora and short-chain fatty acids (SCFA) in
patients on long-term TEN.
Methods:
Ten patients (3 females, 7 males, 59?.5 years), on TEN for a median
of 13 mo (1-125), and 15 healthy volunteers (4 females, 11 males, 32±2.0
years) received Sb (0.5 g bid PO) for 6 d. Two stool samples
were taken before, on the last 2 d and 9-10 d after treatment, for
SCFA measurement and for culture and bacterial identification.
Values (mean±SE) were compared using sign tests and ANOVA.
Results:
Fecal butyrate levels were lower in patients (10.1±2.9
mmol/kg) than in controls (19.2±2.9,
P = 0.02). Treatment with Sb increased total fecal
SCFA levels in patients (150.2±27.2
vs 107.5?8.2 mmol/kg, P = 0.02) but not in controls
(129.0±28.6
vs 113.0±15.2
mmol/kg, NS). At the end of treatment with Sb, patients had
higher fecal butyrate (16.0±4.4
vs 10.1 [2.9] mmol/kg, P = 0.004). Total SCFAs
remained high 9 d after treatment was discon-tinued. Before the
treatment, the anaerobe to aerobe ratio was lower in patients
compared to controls (2.4±2.3
vs 69.8±1.8,
P = 0.003). There were no significant changes in the fecal
flora of TEN patients.
Conclusion:
Sb-induced increase of fecal SCFA concentrations (especially
butyrate) may explain the preventive effects of this yeast on
TEN-induced diarrhea.
©2005 The WJG Press and
Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Key words:
Enteral nutrition; Diarrhea; Saccharomyces boulardii;
Short-chain fatty acids; Intestinal microbiota
Schneider SM, Girard-Pipau F, Filippi J, Hébuterne
X, Moyse D, Hinojosa GC, Pompei A, Rampal P. Effects of Saccharomyces
boulardii on fecal short-chain fatty acids and microflora in
patients on long-term total enteral nutrition. World J
Gastroenterol 2005; 11(39): 6165-6169
http://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/11/6165.asp
INTRODUCTION
Diarrhea is the most
frequent complication of enteral tube feeding, with an incidence as
high as 63%[1]. Its consequences range from discomfort to
life-threatening acidosis, increased morbidity and mortality, and
higher financial costs for health providers[2]. One of
the causes of diarrhea in tube-fed patients may be the consequences
on colonic trophicity of a deficiency in luminal short-chain fatty
acids (SCFAs). We have reported a major imbalance (namely a drop in
the number of fecal anaerobic bacteria and an increase in the number
of aerobic bacteria) in patients on long-term total enteral
nutrition (TEN)[3]. The modifications of the intestinal
microflora induced by a fiber-free polymeric enteral diet can be
compared to those induced by broad-spectrum antibiotics such as
ceftriaxone[4,5]. These effects may be synergic[6] and
explain why antibiotics are a risk factor for enteral
nutrition-induced diarrhea[7,8] and why enteral nutrition
is a risk factor for antibiotic-induced diarrhea[9] and Clostridium
difficile infection[10]. SCFAs, one of the most
important by-products of anaerobes in the colon, are the main fuel
for the colonocyte and they are involved in water and electrolyte
absorption by the colonic mucosa. They have been shown to reverse
fluid secretion in the ascending colon during enteral feeding[11],
and may represent the link between diarrhea and the intestinal
microflora during enteral nutrition.
Saccharomyces
boulardii (Sb) is a
probiotic yeast that has been successfully used for years in the
prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea[12]. Sb
has been proven to prevent the relapse of Clostridium difficile
infection[13], and seems effective in preventing relapses
in patients with Crohn抯 disease[14]. Three
randomized controlled studies have reported its efficacy in the
prevention of diarrhea in TEN patients from intensive care units,
with a reduction in the number of patient-days with diarrhea by
25-83%[15-17]. However, these studies did not address the
mechanisms of action of the probiotic. We therefore designed a
prospective study to assess the effects of Sb on fecal SCFAs
and intestinal microflora in TEN patients. Healthy volunteers (HVO)
were used as controls.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Subjects
The TEN group consisted
of 10 patients (3 females and 7 males), mean age 59±5.5
years (mean±SE), who had been on TEN for a median of 13 mo (range:
1-125 mo). The indication for TEN was dysphagia in six patients
(three head and neck tumors, two strokes, and one resected
neurinoma); three patients had upper gastro-intestinal surgery, and
one patient had low oral intake due to severe depression. Two
patients were receiving proton pump inhibitors. A commercially
available polymeric diet, fiber-, lactose-, and gluten-free, with a
concentration of 1.33 kcal/mL (Sondalis HP?/FONT>, Nestl?Clinical
Nutrition, Noisiel, France) was used to provide 20% protein (50%
from casein and 50% from soy protein), 45% carbohydrate
(maltodextrin), and 31% fat (24% from corn oil, 22% from colza oil,
and 47% as medium-chain triglycerides). Nutrition was given through
gastrostomy (n = 7), jejunostomy (n = 2), or
naso-gastric (n = 1) tubes. Enteral nutrition was total, but
patients who could drink water or tea were allowed to do so. Fifteen
HVO (4 females and 11 males), mean age 32±2.0
years (P<0.05 vs TEN patients) were also studied.
All HVO consumed a regular Western diet, and none of them had a
history of gastrointestinal disease. At the time of the study, all
experimental and normal subjects were in a stable condition, and
none had diarrhea. Energy provided by the diet was covering their
maintenance needs as calculated using the Harris and Benedict
formulas, and the enteral feeds were stable throughout the study. No
subject had undergone colectomy, and none had taken antibiotics or
laxatives for at least 2 wk prior to the study. All subjects gave
their written informed consent and the study was performed according
to the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the regional Ethics
Committee.
Study design
Five hundred milligrams
b.i.d. of Sb as lyophilized powder, provided by Laboratoires
Biocodex (Montrouge, France), were administered orally (HVO) or via
the feeding tube (TEN patients) for six consecutive days. Two fecal
samples were collected at 1-d intervals from all subjects on the 2 d
before treatment, on the last 2 d of treatment, and 9 and 10 d after
treatment was discontinued. Antibiotic or laxative use during the
study was an exclusion criterion.
Stool analysis
Stool samples were taken
immediately after production, and analyzed within 2 h. SCFAs were
studied as follows[18]: an aliquot of 200 mg of feces was
weighed. This was suspended in sterile distilled water (1.6 mL) and
hexanoic acid (0.2 mL) was added. 50% aqueous H2SO4 (0.4 mL) and
diethyl ether (2 mL) were then added. The sample was mixed for 45
min with an orbital shaker, and centrifuged for 5 min at 3 000 r/min
at room temperature. Anhydrous CaCl2 was then added in order to
remove residual water, and 2 μL of the extract was injected in
the gas-liquid chromatograph (Hewlett-Packard 5890 Series II with a
flame ionization detector). The standard solution was as follows:
acetic, propionic, isobutyric, butyric, isovaleric, valeric,
isocaproic, caproic, and hexanoic acids (10 meq/L each); it was
assayed before each stool sample was analyzed. Sensitivity was 1
mmol. 500 mg of feces was taken from the center of the stool,
weighed and submitted to serial dilutions up to 10-8 in BHI broth.
Then, 0.1 mL of each dilution was spread on a range of selective and
non-selective media. Whenever necessary, the media were pre-reduced
to allow anaerobic growth. Media inoculated and incubated at 37
℃ in aerobiosis were as follows: trypticase agar, Columbia
agar supplemented with sheep blood, Columbia agar supplemented with
nalidixic acid and colistin, and Drigalski medium (equivalent to Mac
Conkey medium) at dilutions 10-2, 10-4, and 10-6[19]. For
anaerobic bacteria, media inoculated were as follows: Columbia agar
supplemented with sheep blood spread with the dilutions 10-2, 10-4,
and 10-8, Columbia blood agar supple-mented with kanamycin and
vancomycin, Bifidobacterium agar, and Bacteroides agar
(dilutions 10-2, 10-4, and 10-7), rifampicin agar (10-1 and 10-7),
and CCFA (for isolation of Clostridium difficile), MRS agar
(for isolation of lactobacilli), Veillonella agar, and
crystal violet agar, all spread with dilutions 10-1 and 10-5[19].
The differences between dilutions for each medium were based on the
differences between the concentrations of concerned bacteria[20].
After 24-48 h of incubation in an anaerobic cabinet, the number of
colonies of each colony type growing on each of the media used were
counted. The absence of growth under 50 mL/L carbon dioxide was
verified for anaerobic strains. Routine identification was performed
with standard methods, then with microstrips (API 20 Enterobacteries
or ID 32 Anaerobies, BioMerieux, Marcy L'Etoile, France). The ratio
between anaerobes and aerobes was calculated as a marker of
microbial imbalance[3,21].
Statistical analysis
Results are expressed as
mean±SE. All fecal bacterial counts (colony-forming units [CFU] per
gram of wet feces) were transformed to logarithms (log10 CFU) for
statistical analysis. Values were compared at baseline using a
non-parametric method. Comparisons within groups used a sign test;
differences vs baseline are presented with distribution-free
confidence intervals.
A two-way
ANOVA was performed for quantitative parameters for exploratory
purposes. The model included group (TEN or HVO), period of time
(before, during or after treatment) and interaction group*period of
time; all two by two differences between adjusted means were
calculated and tested using t-tests. No adjustment was
performed in this exploratory context. For SFCA assessments, two
values were considered in the model at each time. Statistics were
performed on SAS software from SAS Institute (Cary, NC, USA).
Differences were considered as statistically significant for P
lower than 0.05. A pilot study that reported a 40% increase of total
SCFA concentration after treatment with Sb allowed us to
calculate a number needed to treat ten subjects per group.
RESULTS
Fecal short-chain fatty acids
Acetate, propionate, and
butyrate values are represented in Table 1. For all three main
SCFAs, no significant change, either during or after treatment, was
observed in HVO. In TEN patients, butyrate concentrations were
increased significantly (about 60%) during treatment. SCFA values 9
d after discontinuing Sb were not significantly different
from baseline. The sum of all SCFAs was increased significantly in
TEN patients under treatment, with an average increase of 42.8
mmol/kg (95%CI: 0.0-55.2, P = 0.02) during treatment and an
average increase of 51.8 mmol/kg (95%CI: 14.4-110.6, P =
0.02) after treatment (Figure 1). There were no changes in HVO.
Minor SCFAs did not change in either group.
Figure 1 Fecal
SCFAs in TEN patients. SCFA: short-chain fatty acids; Sb: Saccharomyces
boulardii; 1P = 0.02 vs pre-treatment values.
ANOVA showed an overall increase for acetate and
SCFA sum after treatment on change from baseline values; significant
interactions were noticed for propionate due to the increase in the
TEN group opposed to a decrease in the HVO group, and for butyrate
corresponding to differences in after-treatment concentrations
higher in the HVO group in spite of higher baseline values in this
group.
Table 1 Fecal SCFAs in TEN patients and HVO
|
|
|
Before treatment
|
During treatment
|
After treatment
|
|
|
|
Concentration
(SEM)
|
Concentration
(SEM)
|
Difference
with pre-treatment
|
Concentration
(SEM)
|
Difference
with pre-treatment
|
|
|
|
Value
(95%CI)
|
P*
|
Value
95%CI)
|
P*
|
|
Acetate
|
TEN
|
69.9
(12.3)
|
97.9
(25.2)
|
28.0
|
0.18
|
110.3
(24.1)
|
40.4
|
0.02
|
|
|
|
|
|
-6.1
; 36.2
|
|
|
14.4
; 71.4
|
|
|
|
HVO
|
71.3
(10.3)
|
98.4
(29.8)
|
27.1
|
0.79
|
111.5
(17.5)
|
40.2
|
0.42
|
|
|
|
|
|
-13.1
; 35.6
|
|
|
-7.0
; 116.0
|
|
|
Propionate
|
TEN
|
20.9
(3.7)
|
26.2
(3.8)
|
5.3
|
0.18
|
26.0
(3.4)
|
5.1
|
0.18
|
|
|
|
|
|
-0.2
; 12.6
|
|
|
-3.3
; 14.3
|
|
|
|
HVO
|
22.9
(3.0)
|
18.4
(2.4)
|
-4.5
|
0.30
|
23.0
(2.7)
|
0.1
|
0.12
|
|
|
|
|
|
-11.8
; 4.5
|
|
|
-3.1
; 6.9
|
|
|
Butyrate
|
TEN
|
10.1
(2.9)
|
16.0
(4.4)
|
5.8
|
0.004
|
12.9
(2.5)
|
2.7
|
0.51
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
; 12.3
|
|
|
-3.9
; 12.3
|
|
|
|
HVO
|
19.2
(3.9)
|
16.4
(3.3)
|
-2.7
|
0.61
|
23.3
(3.1)
|
4.1
|
0.12
|
|
|
|
|
|
-9.7
; 5.6
|
|
|
-1.4
; 16.3
|
|
Values in mmol/kg of
wet feces: mean (SE); TEN: total enteral nutrition, HVO: healthy
volunteers. 1Probability of sign test.
Table 2 Fecal bacterial populations in TEN patients and HVO
|
|
Before
treatment
Concentration
|
During
treatment
Concentration
|
After
treatment
Concentration
|
|
Total
bacteria
|
TEN
|
9.64 (.31)
|
9.31 (.41)
|
9.54 (.36)
|
|
(logCFU/g)
|
HVO
|
9.53 (.16)
|
9.56 (.21)
|
9.20 (.19)
|
|
Anaerobes
|
TEN
|
8.25 (1.01)
|
7.72 (.76)
|
8.63 (.62)
|
|
(logCFU/g)
|
HVO
|
9.47 (.16)
|
8.73 (.45)
|
8.97 (.25)
|
|
Aerobes
|
TEN
|
8.84 (.26)
|
8.83 (.34)
|
8.71 (.32)
|
|
(logCFU/g)
|
HVO
|
7.63 (.22)
|
7.63 (.24)
|
7.61 (.26)
|
|
Anaerobes/Aerobes
ratio
|
TEN
|
2.42 (2.28)
|
0.51 (2.23)
|
2.89 (2.43)
|
|
|
HVO
|
69.81 (1.81)
|
60.13 (2.47)
|
23.02 (2.01)
|
Mean (SE). TEN,
total enteral nutrition; HVO, healthy volunteers. No significant
difference.
Fecal flora
Before treatment, there
were significant differences in the fecal flora between HVO and TEN
patients, as the latter had higher counts of aerobic bacteria and a
lower anaerobes/aerobes ratio (Table 2). Among aerobes, the number
of enterococci was higher in TEN patients (7.42±0.64
log CFU/g) than in HVO (6.1±0.46
log CFU/g, P = 0.02). Among anaerobes, peptostreptococci and Bifidobacterium
spp., present in HVO, were absent in TEN patients. Clostridium
difficile was not identified in any subject. There were no
significant changes in the numbers of colony forming units of
individual species or groups of bacteria in TEN patients during
treatment with Sb, or after treatment. The only change
observed in HVO was a decrease of Gram-positive anaerobes from
8.6?.3 log CFU/g to 6.8±0.8
during treatment (P = 0.035).
Tolerance
There were no
significant changes in the number of bowel movements and the
consistency of stools during or after treatment in either HVO or TEN
patients (data not shown). No fever or fungemia was reported. The
only adverse effect attributed to Sb was a case of mild
diarrhea in one patient which resolved without discontinuation of
treatment.
DISCUSSION
This study shows that both
the fecal concentration of butyric acid and the anaerobe/aerobe
ratio were lower in patients at high risk for diarrhea due to TEN
than in HVO. Despite great inter-individual variations, treatment
with Sb increased total SCFAs and butyrate fecal
concentrations in TEN patients with a long-lasting increase of total
SCFA concentrations when treatment was discontinued. Treatment with Sb
did not affect the fecal flora in TEN patients, while it decreased
Gram-positive anaerobes in HVO.
Sb
is known to interact with the intestinal flora. Yeast proteins have
been shown to neutralize cholera toxin[22] and to repress
Clostridium difficile toxins A and B[23]; Sb
also has an antagonistic effect on the growth of pathogenic
micro-organisms in the intestine[24]. In our study,
increased SCFA concentrations might explain the reported prevention
by Sb of TEN-induced diarrhea by an increased water and
electrolyte absorption and by a reduction in colonic pH, even though
it was not measured in the stool samples from our subjects. A lower
pH inhibits the growth of Clostridium difficile[25,26],
a bacteria that can be acquired in up to 15% of hospitalized EN
patients[10]. A viable mixed culture of Lactobacillus
acidophilus and Lactobacillus bulgaricus (1 g t.i.d.)
failed to prevent diarrhea in hospital inpatients receiving EN in a
randomized controlled study[27]. Unlike Sb,
lactobacilli taken orally do not increase SCFA fecal levels[28,29],
which might explain these negative results. Prebiotics can also
increase SCFAs in the colon; in a recently published study,
administration for 2 wk of a soluble dietary fiber (galactomannans)
in 20 elderly inpatients receiving EN was shown to decrease the
water content of the feces and the frequency of daily bowel
movements[30]. These results were associated with an
increase of fecal SCFA levels, significant for total SCFAs, acetic
and propionic acids. Although we confirmed the 40% increase in total
SCFAs in the pilot phase of the study that was used to determine the
number of subjects, a high variability prevented some important
differences from reaching statistical significance. This variability
did not seem to be time- or diet-dependent, as it was comparable in
volunteers on a free diet and in patients who were on a stable
controlled diet. Sb recovery in the stools after chronic
administration is known to reach a plateau by the 3rd d and to
disappear 5 d after treatment is discontinued[31]. The
persistence of the effects on total SCFA concentrations 9-10 d after
Sb discontinuation is suggestive of a prolonged action of the
yeast and may indicate that daily treatment may not be necessary to
sustain its effects on fecal SCFA concentrations.
known to be
associated with a decrease of fecal anaerobes[35];
however, age does not influence fecal SCFA levels[36];
(2) Bacterial concentrations are known to differ depending on the
intestinal segment in which samples are taken; nevertheless,
analysis of feces is the most feasible technique and provides an
accurate information on the intestinal microflora[37];
(3) Analysis of samples rather than 24 h-stools certainly deprives
us of some information as TEN is known to modify the volume of daily
stools. However, stool collection is often difficult in bed-ridden
patients, especially those with neurological disorders. This is the
main reason why we chose to perform this study in patients without
diarrhea; (4) The correlation between SCFAs and bacterial counts in
feces is reportedly poor[38]; (5) Lastly a standard
bacterial count, however thorough, may miss some information.
Molecular techniques[39] may help progressing in this
field.
There is
growing evidence regarding the health benefits of probiotics. In EN
patients; besides prevention of diarrhea, a recent study reports
less post-operative infections in patients receiving EN supplemented
with fiber and Lactobacillus plantarum 299 than in those
receiving parenteral nutrition of fiber-free TEN[40].
In
conclusion, this study suggests one possible mechanism of action of
the probiotic yeast Sb, especially for its preventive effects
in enteral nutrition-induced diarrhea. It also supports its use,
especially in patients who have other risk factors, such as
antibiotic intake.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank
Dr. Christine Alquier and Dr. Marie-Emmanuelle Le Guern for their
invaluable help with study design and data handling, and Dr.
Philippe Marteau and Dr. Ian Janssen for their advice.
REFERENCES
1
Bliss
DZ, Guenter PA, Settle RG. Defining and reporting diarrhea in
tube-fed patients - what a mess! Am J Clin Nutr 1992;
55: 753-759
2 Adam S, Batson S. A study of
problems associated with the delivery of enteral feed in critically
ill patients in five ICUs in
the UK. Intensive Care Med
1997; 23: 261-266
3 Schneider SM, Le Gall P,
Girard-Pipau F, Piche T, Pompei A, Nano JL. Total artificial
nutrition is associated with major
changes in the fecal flora. Eur
J Nutr 2000; 39: 248-255
4 Welling GW, Meijer-Severs GJ,
Helmus G, van Santen E, Tonk RH, de Vries-Hospers HG. The effect of
ceftriaxone on the
anaerobic bacterial flora and
the bacterial enzymatic activity in the intestinal tract. Infection
1991; 19: 313-316
5 Meijer-Severs GJ, Van Santen E,
Meijer BC. Short-chain fatty acid and organic acid concentrations in
feces of healthy
human volunteers and their
correlations with anaerobe cultural counts during systemic
ceftriaxone administration. ScandJ
Gastroenterol 1990; 25:
698-704
6 Hébuterne X, Schneider SM.
Impact of enteral nutrition on gastrointestinal functions. Clin
Nutr 2001; 20(Suppl 2): 57-61
7 Keohane PP, Attrill H, Love M,
Frost P, Silk DB. Relation between osmolality of diet and
gastrointestinal side effects in
enteral nutrition. Br Med J
1984; 288: 678-680
8 Guenter PA, Settle RG, Perlmutter
S, Marino PL, DeSimone GA, Rolandelli RH. Tube feeding-related
diarrhea in acutelyill
patients. J Parenter Enteral
Nutr 1991; 15: 277-280
9 Surawicz CM, Elmer GW, Speelman P,
McFarland LV, Chinn J, van Belle G. Prevention of
antibiotic-associated diarrhea by
Saccharomyces boulardii:
a prospective study. Gastroenterology 1989; 96:
981-988
10 Bliss DZ, Johnson S, Savik K,
Clabots CR, Willard K, Gerding DN. Acquisition of Clostridium
difficile and Clostridium
difficile-associated
diarrhea in hospitalized patients receiving tube feeding. Ann
Intern Med 1998; 129: 1012-1019
11 Bowling TE, Raimundo AH, Grimble GK,
Silk DB. Reversal by short-chain fatty acids of colonic fluid
secretion induced by
enteral feeding. Lancet
1993; 342: 1266-1268
12 D's ouza AL, Rajkumar C, Cooke J,
Bulpitt CJ. Probiotics in prevention of antibiotic-associated
diarrhea: meta-analysis.
BMJ 2002; 324:
1361-1366
13 McFarland LV, Surawicz CM, Greenberg RN,
Fekety R, Elmer GW, Moyer KA, Melcher SA, Bowen KE, Cox JL, Noorani
Z.
A randomized placebo-controlled
trial of Saccharomyces boulardii in combination with standard
antibiotics for Clostridium
difficile disease. JAMA
1994; 271: 1913-1918
14 Guslandi M, Mezzi G, Sorghi M, Testoni
PA. Saccharomyces boulardii in maintenance treatment of Crohn's
disease. Dig
Dis Sci 2000; 45:
1462-1464
15 Bleichner G, Bléhaut H, Mentec H, Moyse
D. Saccharomyces boulardii prevents diarrhea in critically
ill tube-fed patients.
A multicenter, randomized,
double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Intensive Care Med
1997; 23: 517-523
16 chlotterer M, Bernasconi P, Lebreton F,
Wassermann D. Intérêt de Saccharomyces boulardii dans la
tolérance
digestive de la nutrition entérale
à débit continu chez le brûlé Nutr Clin Metabol 1987; 1:
31-34
17 TempéJD, Steidel AL, Béhaut H, Hasselmann M,
Lutun P, Maurier F. Prévention
par Saccharomyces boulardii des
diarrhées
de l' limentation entérale à débit
continu. Sem Hop Paris 1983; 59: 1409-1412
18 Holdeman LV, Cato EP, Moore WEC. Anaerobe
laboratory manual, anaerobe laboratory. 4th edn ed. Blacksburg
VA
Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and State University 1977
19 Phillips E, Nash P. Culture media. In:
Lennette EH, Balows A, Hausler Jr WJ, Shadomy HJ, editors. Manual of
Clinical
Microbiology. 4th edition ed. Washington
DC American Society for Microbiology 1985: 1051-1092
20 Drasar BS, Roberts AK. Methods for the
study of anaerobic microflora. In: Levett PN, editor. Anaerobic
microbiology. A
practical approach. Oxford
Oxford University Press 1991: 183-200
21 Ruseler-van Embden JG, Schouten WR, van
Lieshout LM. Pouchitis: result of microbial imbalance? Gut
1994; 35:
658-664
22 Czerucka D, Roux I, Rampal P. Saccharomyces
boulardii inhibits secretagogue-mediated adenosine 3?5?
cyclic
monophosphate induction in
intestinal cells. Gastroenterology 1994; 106: 65-72
23 Castagliuolo I, Riegler MF, Valenick L,
LaMont JT, Pothoulakis C. Saccharomyces boulardii protease
inhibits the effects
of Clostridium difficile
toxins A and B in human colonic mucosa. Infect Immun 1999; 67:
302-307
24 Ducluzeau R, Bensaada M. Effet comparé
de l'administration unique ou en continu de Saccharomyces
boulardii sur
l'établissement
de diverses souches de Candida dans le tractus digestif de
souris gnotoxéniques.
Ann Microbiol 1982;
118B: 491-501
25 Rolfe RD. Role of volatile fatty acids
in colonization resistance to Clostridium difficile. Infect
Immun 1984; 45: 185-191
26 Wang X, Gibson GR. Effects of the in
vitro fermentation of oligofructose and inulin by bacteria
growing in the human
large intestine. J Appl
Bacteriol 1993; 75: 373-380
27 Heimburger DC, Sockwell DG, Geels WJ.
Diarrhea with enteral feeding: prospective reappraisal of putative
causes.
Nutrition 1994; 10:
392-396
28 Hove H, Nordgaard-Andersen I, Mortensen
PB. Effect of lactic acid bacteria on the intestinal production of
lactate and
short-chain fatty acids, and
the absorption of lactose. Am J Clin Nutr 1994; 59:
74-79
29 Fukuda M, Kanauchi O, Araki Y, Andoh A,
Mitsuyama K, Takagi K. Prebiotic treatment of experimental colitis
with
germinated barley foodstuff: a
comparison with probiotic or antibiotic treatment. Int J Mol Med
2002; 9: 65-70
30 Nakao M, Ogura Y, Satake S, Ito I,
Iguchi A, Takagi K. Usefulness of soluble dietary fiber for the
treatment of diarrhea
during enteral nutrition in
elderly patients. Nutrition 2002; 18: 35-39
31 Bléhaut
H, Massot J, Elmer GW, Levy RH. Disposition kinetics of Saccharomyces
boulardii in man and rat. BiopharmDrug
Dispos 1989; 10:
353-364
32 Wells CL, Maddaus MA, Reynolds CM,
Jechorek RP, Simmons RL. Role of anaerobic flora in the
translocation of aerobic
and facultatively anaerobic
intestinal bacteria. Infect Immun 1987; 55: 2689-2694
33 Cummings JH, Macfarlane GT. Role of
intestinal bacteria in nutrient metabolism. Clin Nutr 1997; 16:
3-11
34 Zimmaro DM, Rolandelli RH, Koruda MJ,
Settle RG, Stein TP, Rombeau JL. Isotonic tube feeding formula
induces liquid
stool in normal subjects:
reversal by pectin. J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1989; 13:
117-123
35 Hopkins M, Sharp R, Macfarlane G. Age
and disease-related changes in intestinal bacterial populations
assessed by cell
culture, 16S-rRNA abundance,
and community cellular fatty acid profiles. Gut 2001; 48:
198-205
36 Weaver GA, Krause JA, Miller TL, Wolin
MJ. Short chain fatty acid distributions of enema samples from a
sigmoidoscopy
population: an association of
high acetate and low butyrate ratios with adenomatous polyps and
colon cancer. Gut 1988;
29: 1539-1543
37 Whelan K, Judd PA, Preedy VR, Taylor MA.
Enteral feeding: the effect on faecal output, the faecal microflora
and SCFA
concentrations. Proc Nutr
Soc 2004; 63: 105-113
38 Meijer-Severs GJ, van Santen E.
Short-chain fatty acid and organic acid concentrations in feces of
10 humanvolunteers
and their correlation with
anaerobe cultural counts over a 15-mo period. Scand J
Gastroenterol 1989; 24: 1276-1280
39 Harmsen HJ, Gibson GR, Elfferich P,
Raangs GC, Wildeboer-Veloo AC, Argaiz A. Comparison of viable cell
counts and
fluorescence in situ
hybridization using specific rRNA-based probes for the
quantification of human fecal bacteria. FEMS
Microbiol Lett 2000; 183:
125-129
40 Rayes N, Hansen S, Seehofer D, Muller
AR, Serke S, Bengmark S. Early enteral supply of fiber and
Lactobacilli versus
conventional nutrition: a
controlled trial in patients with major abdominal surgery. Nutrition
2002; 18: 609-615
Science Editor
Guo SY Language Editor Elsevier HK
| |