Remission induction and maintenance effect of probiotics on ulcerative colitis: A meta-analysis

Table 1 Characteristics of included studies

Study	Disease severity	Probiotic	Control group	Dose of pro-biotic/day)	Treatment duration	N (probiotic/control group)	induction or maintenance of remission N (probiotic/control group)
Miele et al[13], 2009	Mild-to-moderate	VSL#3	Placebo	450-1800 × 109	12 mo	14/15	Induction of remission 13/4; Maintenance of remission 11/4
Sood et al[12], 2009	Mild-to-moderate	VSL#3	Placebo	3.6 × 1012	12 wk	77/70	Induction of remission 33/11
Henker et al[15], 2008	Inactive UC	E. coli Nissle 1917	5-ASA	5 × 1010	12 mo	24/10	Maintenance of remission 18/7
Zocco et al[20], 2006	Inactive UC	Lactobacillus GG	Mesalazine	18 × 109	12 mo	65/60/62	Maintenance of remission 55/48/52
Matthes et al[11], 2006	Mild-to-moderate	E. coli Nissle 1917	Placebo	10-40 × 108	4 wk	46/11	Induction of remission 20/2
Furrie et al[9], 2005	Active	Synbiotic (Bifidobacterium longum + inulin-oligofructose)	Potato starch and sachet of 6 g powdered maltodextrose	4 × 1011	4 wk	9/9	Induction of remission 5/3
Tursi et al[8], 2004	Mild-to-moderate	Balsalazide/VSL#3	Mesalazine/balsalazide	900 × 108	8 wk	30/30/30	Induction of remission 24/21/16
Kruis et al[18], 2004	Inactive	E. coli Nissle 1917	Mesalazine	2.5-25 × 109	12 mo	162/165	Maintenance of remission 89/104
Kato et al[10], 2004	Mild-to-moderate	Bifidobacterium breve strain Yakult Bifidobacterium bifidum strain Yakult Lactobacillus acidophilus	BFM without B. bifidum and L. acidophilus	109	12 wk	10/10	Induction of remission 4/3
Cui et al[16], 2004	Active	Bifidobacteria	Starch	1.26 g/d	8 wk	15/15	Maintenance of remission 12/1
Ishikawa et al[17], 2003	Mild-to-moderate	Bifidobacterium Breve Bifidobacterium Bifidum Lactobacillus acidophilus YIT 0168	BFM without these Bifidobacteria	10 × 108	12 mo	11/10	Maintenance of remission 8/1
Rembacken et al[14], 1999	Active	E. coli Nissle 1917 serotype O6: K5: H1	Mesalazine	5 × 1010	12 mo	57/59	Induction of remission 39/44; Maintenance of remission 31/27
Kruis et al[19], 1997	Inactive UC	E. coli Nissle 1917 serotype O6: K5: H1	Mesalazine	50 × 109	12 wk	50/53	Maintenance of remission 42/51

E. coli:Escherichia coli.

Table 2 Methodological quality of the 13 RCTs

Study	Random method	Allocation concealment	Blind method	Lost or exit	Quality assessment	Inclusion/exclusion criteria	Outcome measurement
Miele et al[13], 2009	Right	Right	Double blind	Yes, use ITT analysis	A	Both	CAI by Lichtiger; EI score; HI score
Sood et al[12], 2009	Right	Right	Double blind	Yes, use ITT analysis	A	Both	DAI by Sutherland
Henker et al[15], 2008	Right	Non-described	Non-described	No	B	Inclusion criteria	CAI by Rachmilewitz
Zocco et al[20], 2006	Right	Non-described	Non-described	No	B	Both	CAI by Rachmilewitz; EI by Baron; HI by Truelove-Richard
Matthes et al[11], 2006	Right	Not used	Double blind	Yes, use ITT analysis	C	Not mentioned	DAI by Sutherland
Furrie et al[9], 2005	Right	Non-described	Double blind	No	B	Inclusion criteria	CAI by Walmsley; SI by Baron
Tursi et al[8], 2004	Right	Non-described	Non-described	Yes, use ITT analysis	B	Both	CAI by Lennard; EI score; HI score
Kruis et al[18], 2004	Right	Right	Double blind	Yes, use ITT analysis	A	Both	Scores according to Rachmilewitz
Kato et al[10], 2004	Right	Non-described	Non-described	No	B	Both	CAI by Lichtiger; EI by Harig, Scheppach; HI by Matts
Cui et al[16], 2004	Right	Not used	Non-described	No	C	Not mentioned	Not mentioned
Ishikawa et al[17], 2003	Right	Non-described	Non-described	No	B	Inclusion criteria	Exacerbation of clinical symptoms
Rembacken et al[14], 1999	Right	Non-described	Double blind	Yes, use ITT analysis	B	Inclusion criteria	Scores according to Rachmilewitz
Kruis et al[19], 1997	Right	Non-described	Double blind	Yes, use ITT analysis	B	Both	The same of the CAI score under the E. coli and mesalazine; Scores according to Rachmilewitz

CAI: Clinical activity index; SI: Sigmoidoscopy index; EI: Endoscopy; HI: Histology index.