Search

Background: Infantile colic is a disturbing problem for parents. The Rome IV criteria are the last modality for the diagnosis of colic. Available medications have variable effects on the treatment of colic. However, no definite treatment has been identified yet. Aims: To our knowledge, few clinical trials have compared the efficacy of synbiotics in infantile colic, so the present study was conducted. Material and methods: This study was performed on 120 infants (51.66% boys; mean age: 42.09 ± 21.14 days; mean birth weight: 3,155 ± 420 g) with the diagnosis of infantile colic resistant to conservative therapy. The infants were randomly divided into groups A and B. A synbiotic containing B. infantis, L. reuteri, L. rhamnosus, and fructooligosaccharides (FOS) (PediLact® [Zist-Takhmir Co., Tehran, Iran] drop) was administered to group A, while group B received a synbiotic containing B. lactis and FOS (BBCare® [Zist-Takhmir Co., Tehran, Iran] drop). The primary outcome was the response rate to each synbiotic, and the secondary outcome was the complications of each synbiotic. Results: The response rate to both synbiotics was significant after 1 week of intervention (1.97 ± 0.91 [44.95%] versus 1.64 ± 0.77 [54.23%], p = 0.000). Both groups showed a significant response rate to each synbiotic after 1 month of intervention too (1.19 ± 0.84 [63.48%] versus 0.70 ± 0.48 [79.65%], p = 0.000). The response rate was significantly higher in group B compared to group A after 1 week (54.23% versus 44.95%) and after 1 month (79.65% versus 63.48%) of intervention. Neither synbiotic was associated with adverse effects. Conclusion: The present study showed that both synbiotics were effective in the treatment of infantile colic. However, the synbiotic containing B. lactis was significantly more effective than the synbiotic containing B. infantis, L. reuteri, and L. rhamnosus in infantile colic.

Penal approaches in transnational law have basically focused on substantial rules and faced serious challenges of which the misleading conceptual agendas, fast and furious shifts in cultural and behavioral patterns of crime, and controversies about global mechanisms of normative description are remarkable. My paper suggests that the existing criminal mechanisms are, basically fostered by procedural policies without further references to the confusingly diversity of new crime patterns. Its central theme is to draw a reliable theoretical framework of a supranational network that acts upon procedural criminal rules. Flexibility and accountability in administrative policies and procedural standards should be patiently developed in relevant with the current penal findings. I argue that the successful implication and institutionalization of substantial norms in the supranational project is positively achievable through network assistance. In other words, the missing theorem or discourses that might address the substantial rules or be directed toward creating a fruitful debate that ends in normative penal standards for dealing global crimes must be reflected in a network of systemic cooperation. There will be also an argumentation regarding the need for a thematic exploration of substantial rules that would form the supranational network as conceptual approaches with priority over procedural mechanisms.