Search

Objective: To evaluate the impact of administering probiotics to prevent Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) among patients receiving therapeutic antibiotics., Design: Stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial between September 1, 2016, and August 31, 2019., Setting: This study was conducted in 4 acute-care hospitals across an integrated health region., Patients: Hospitalized patients, aged ≥55 years., Methods: Patients were given 2 probiotic capsules daily (Bio-K+, Laval, Quebec, Canada), containing 50 billion colony-forming units of Lactobacillus acidophilus CL1285, L. casei LBC80R, and L. rhamnosus CLR2. We measured hospital-acquired CDI (HA-CDI) and the number of positive C. difficile tests per 10,000 patient days as well as adherence to administration of Bio-K+ within 48 and 72 hours of antibiotic administration. Mixed-effects generalized linear models, adjusted for influenza admissions and facility characteristics, were used to evaluate the impact of the intervention on outcomes., Results: Overall adherence of Bio-K+ administration ranged from 76.9% to 84.6% when stratified by facility and periods. Rates of adherence to administration within 48 and 72 hours of antibiotic treatment were 60.2% -71.4% and 66.7%-75.8%, respectively. In the adjusted analysis, there was no change in HA-CDI (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-1.23) or C. difficile positivity rate (IRR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.89-1.24). Discharged patients may not have received a complete course of Bio-K+. Our hospitals had a low baseline incidence of HA-CDI. Patients who did not receive Bio-K+ may have differential risks of acquiring CDI, introducing selection bias., Conclusions: Hospitals considering probiotics as a primary prevention strategy should consider the baseline incidence of HA-CDI in their population and timing of probiotics relative to the start of antimicrobial administration.

Introduction: Group B streptococcus (GBS), or Streptococcus agalactiae , remains a leading cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. Canadian guidelines advise universal maternal screening for GBS colonisation in pregnancy in conjunction with selective antibiotic therapy. This results in over 1000 pregnant individuals receiving antibiotic therapy to prevent one case of early-onset neonatal GBS disease, and over 20 000 pregnant individuals receiving antibiotic therapy to prevent one neonatal death. Given the growing concern regarding the risk of negative sequela from antibiotic exposure, it is vital that alternative approaches to reduce maternal GBS colonisation are explored.Preliminary studies suggest some probiotic strains could confer protection in pregnancy against GBS colonisation., Methods and Analysis: This double-blind parallel group randomised trial aims to recruit 450 pregnant participants in Vancouver, BC, Canada and will compare GBS colonisation rates in those who have received a daily oral dose of three strains of probiotics with those who have received a placebo. The primary outcome will be GBS colonisation status, measured using a vaginal/rectal swab obtained between 35 weeks' gestation and delivery. Secondary outcomes will include maternal antibiotic exposure and urogenital infections. Analysis will be on an intention-to-treat basis., Patient or Public Involvement: There was no patient or public involvement in the design of the study protocol., Ethics and Dissemination: This study protocol received ethics approval from the University of British Columbia's Clinical Research Ethics Board, Dublin City University and Health Canada. Findings will be presented at research rounds, conferences and in peer-reviewed publications., Trial Registration Number: NCT03407157., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: It is unknown if probiotics exert pathogen-specific effects in children with diarrhea secondary to acute gastroenteritis., Methods: Analysis of patient-level data from 2 multicenter randomized, placebo controlled trials conducted in pediatric emergency departments in Canada and the United States. Participants were 3-48 months with >3 diarrheal episodes in the preceding 24 hours and were symptomatic for <72 hours and <7 days in the Canadian and US studies, respectively. Participants received either placebo or a probiotic preparation (Canada-Lactobacillus rhamnosus R0011/Lactobacillus helveticus R0052; US-L. rhamnosus GG). The primary outcome was post-intervention moderate-to-severe disease (ie, ≥9 on the Modified Vesikari Scale [MVS] score)., Results: Pathogens were identified in specimens from 59.3% of children (928/1565). No pathogen groups were less likely to experience an MVS score ≥9 based on treatment allocation (test for interaction = 0.35). No differences between groups were identified for adenovirus (adjusted relative risk [aRR]: 1.42; 95% confidence interval [CI]: .62, 3.23), norovirus (aRR: 0.98; 95% CI: .56, 1.74), rotavirus (aRR: 0.86; 95% CI: .43, 1.71) or bacteria (aRR: 1.19; 95% CI: .41, 3.43). At pathogen-group and among individual pathogens there were no differences in diarrhea duration or the total number of diarrheal stools between treatment groups, regardless of intervention allocation or among probiotic sub-groups. Among adenovirus-infected children, those administered the L. rhamnosus R0011/L. helveticus R0052 product experienced fewer diarrheal episodes (aRR: 0.65; 95% CI: .47, .90)., Conclusions: Neither probiotic product resulted in less severe disease compared to placebo across a range of the most common etiologic pathogens. The preponderance of evidence does not support the notion that there are pathogen specific benefits associated with probiotic use in children with acute gastroenteritis., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT01773967 and NCT01853124., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: To assess whether probiotic supplementation may reduce disease-linked systemic immune activation in people living with HIV with the immunologic nonresponder phenotype., Design: Phase 2b, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot trial., Methods: HIV-positive individuals with blood CD4+ T-cell counts <350/mm3 despite viral suppression were randomized to 2:1 to receive De Simone Formulation Probiotic (DSFP; "Visbiome" commercially) or placebo for 48 weeks; target enrollment was 36 patients. The primary endpoint was the change in blood CD8+ T-cell coexpression of human leukocyte antigen-DR isotype and CD38 ("CD8 activation"). Secondary endpoints included biomarkers of inflammation, immune reconstitution, bacterial translocation, and gut permeability. Adjusted linear regression and linear mixed regression methods evaluated the differences between study arms from baseline to week 48. Study monitoring was performed by the CIHR Canadian HIV Trials Network Data Safety Monitoring Committee., Results: Nineteen patients received DSFP, whereas 10 received placebo. One probiotic arm patient withdrew early. Blood CD8 activation increased 0.82 percentage points (pp) in the probiotic arm (95% confidence interval: -1.23 to 2.87;) and decreased by 2.06 pp in the placebo arm (-4.81 to 0.70; between arms P = 0.097). CD4+ T-cell activation (%HLA-DR+) decreased in the placebo arm [-3.79 pp (-7.32 to -0.26)] but increased in the probiotic arm [1.64 (-0.98 to 4.26); between arms P = 0.018]. No differences were observed in plasma or urine biomarkers of inflammation or microbial translocation., Conclusions: Blood immune activation markers in immunologic nonresponder individuals on effective antiretroviral treatment were not reduced by supplementation with DSFP; CD4+ T-cell activation may have been increased., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Alterations in bowel habits are common during critical illness, and bowel protocols are gaining acceptance. Our objective was to characterize bowel protocols in a cross-sectional analysis of ICUs., Materials and Methods: We engaged 44 adult ICUs and performed content analysis of bowel protocols, addressing initiation criteria, medications incorporated, medication escalation, discontinuation criteria, stool assessment methods, and protocol contraindications., Results: Bowel protocols operated in 33/44 ICUs (79.5%). The commonest medications were senna (81.0%) and bisacodyl (75.6%). Less common agents were sodium phosphate (45.9%), glycerin (43.2%), docusate sodium (43.2%), polyethylene glycol 3350 (37.8%), lactulose (29.7%), sodium citrate (16.2%), milk of magnesia (13.5%) and mineral oil (16.2%). Bowel protocols were activated by nurses (62.8%) based on initiation criteria [no bowel movement for 24-96 h (35.1%), opioid use (18.9%), "at risk for constipation" (13.5%), stool on digital rectal exam (10.8%), feeding initiation (10.8%), and ICU admission (8.1%)]. Laxative escalation criteria included time from last bowel movement (59.4%), opioid use (18.9%) and no stool on digital rectal exam (10.8%), while 15 (40.5%) included diarrhea as a discontinuation criterion., Conclusions: Bowel protocols have variable initiation, escalation, and discontinuation criteria incorporating different classes of laxatives, reflecting unclear evidence about optimal bowel management strategies in ICU., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None of the authors disclose any competing interests., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is the most common healthcare-associated infection in critically ill patients. Prior studies suggest that probiotics may reduce VAP and other infections in critically ill patients; however, most previous randomised trials were small, single centre studies. The Probiotics: Prevention of Severe Pneumonia and Endotracheal Colonization Trial (PROSPECT) aims to determine the impact of the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG on VAP and other clinically important outcomes in critically ill adults., Methods: PROSPECT is a multicentre, concealed, randomised, stratified, blinded, controlled trial in patients ≥18 years old, anticipated to be mechanically ventilated ≥72 hours, in intensive care units (ICUs) in Canada, the USA and Saudi Arabia. Patients receive either 1×10 10  colony forming units of L. rhamnosus GG twice daily or an identical appearing placebo. Those at increased risk of probiotic infection are excluded. The primary outcome is VAP. Secondary outcomes are other ICU-acquired infections including Clostridioides difficile infection, diarrhoea (including antibiotic-associated diarrhoea), antimicrobial use, ICU and hospital length of stay and mortality. The planned sample size of 2650 patients is based on an estimated 15% VAP rate and will provide 80% power to detect a 25% relative risk reduction., Ethics and Dissemination: This protocol and statistical analysis plan outlines the methodology, primary and secondary analyses, sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses. PROSPECT is approved by Health Canada (#9427-M1133-45C), the research ethics boards of all participating hospitals and Public Health Ontario. Results will be disseminated via academic channels (peer reviewed journal publications, professional healthcare fora including international conferences) and conventional and social media. The results of PROSPECT will inform practice guidelines worldwide., Trialregistration Number: NCT02462590; Pre-results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To establish the minimally important difference (MID) that would prompt parents and clinicians to use probiotics for prevention of paediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD) and to obtain parent and clinician opinion about the most important outcomes in clinical trials of AAD., Methods: In this survey, parents of children presenting to the emergency department of a Canadian tertiary care children's hospital and paediatricians working in that hospital were approached. A range of potential MIDs were presented and participants selected one that they would require to use probiotics for AAD prevention. In addition, participants were asked to rate a list of outcomes they would consider to be important in clinical trials of AAD., Results: In total, 127 parents and 45 paediatricians participated. About 51% (64/125) of parents and 51% (21/41) of clinicians responding to the MID question reported they would use probiotics if it reduced the risk of AAD by 39% (ie, reduce the risk of AAD from 19% to 12%). The most important outcomes to parents, in descending order, were need for hospitalisation, prevention of dehydration, disruption of normal daily activities, diarrhoea duration and physician revisit. Paediatricians considered need for hospitalisation along with physician revisit as the most important outcomes. They rated prevention of dehydration, diarrhoea duration and stool frequency as important outcomes as well., Conclusion: There is good agreement between parents and clinicians regarding how effective probiotics would need to be in preventing AAD in order to warrant use. This information, along with outcomes perceived to be most important, will help in the design of future clinical trials., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: There is accumulating evidence supporting the use of probiotics, which are defined as "live micro-organisms which, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host", as a preventive measure against respiratory tract infections (RTI). Two recent meta-analyses showed probiotic consumption (daily intake of 107 to 1010 CFU in any form for up to 3 months) significantly reduced RTI duration, frequency, antibiotic use and work absenteeism., Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of probiotic use in terms of number of RTI episodes and days averted, and the number of antibiotic prescriptions and missed workdays averted, in the general population of Canada. In addition, the corresponding economic impact from both a healthcare payer and a productivity perspective was estimated., Methods: A microsimulation model was developed to reproduce the Canadian population (sample rate of 1/1000 = 35 540 individuals) employing age and gender. RTI incidence was taken from FluWatch consultation rates for influenza-like illness (2013-14) and StatCan all-cause consultations statistics. The model was calibrated on a 2.1% RTI annual incidence in the general population (5.2 million RTI days) and included known risk factors (smoking status, shared living conditions and vaccination status). RTI-related antibiotic prescriptions and work absenteeism were obtained from the literature., Results: The results indicate that probiotic use saved 573 000-2.3 million RTI-days, according to the YHEC-Cochrane scenarios respectively. These reductions were associated with an avoidance of 52 000-84 000 antibiotic courses and 330 000-500 000 sick-leave days. A projection of corresponding costs reductions amounted to Can$1.3-8.9 million from the healthcare payer perspective and Can$61.2-99.7 million when adding productivity losses., Conclusion: The analysis shows that the potential of probiotics to reduce RTI-related events may have a substantial clinical and economic impact in Canada., Competing Interests: ILW is employed by Danone and LG is employed by IMS RWES HEOR. Both employers were not involved in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. DR and GR do not declare any competing interest.

OBJECTIVE To conduct a full economic evaluation assessing the costs and consequences related to probiotic use for the primary prevention of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD). DESIGN Cost-effectiveness analysis using decision analytic modeling. METHODS A cost-effectiveness analysis was used to evaluate the risk of CDAD and the costs of receiving oral probiotics versus not over a time horizon of 30 days. The target population modeled was all adult inpatients receiving any therapeutic course of antibiotics from a publicly funded healthcare system perspective. Effectiveness estimates were based on a recent systematic review of probiotics for the primary prevention of CDAD. Additional estimates came from local data and the literature. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess how plausible changes in variables impacted the results. RESULTS Treatment with oral probiotics led to direct costs of CDN $24 per course of treatment per patient. On average, patients treated with oral probiotics had a lower overall cost compared with usual care (CDN $327 vs $845). The risk of CDAD was reduced from 5.5% in those not receiving oral probiotics to 2% in those receiving oral probiotics. These results were robust to plausible variation in all estimates. CONCLUSIONS Oral probiotics as a preventive strategy for CDAD resulted in a lower risk of CDAD as well as cost-savings. The cost-savings may be greater in other healthcare systems that experience a higher incidence and cost associated with CDAD. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;37:1079-1086.

Background: To address the significant morbidity and mortality rates associated with nosocomial Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD), a series of recommendations and a pathway to prevention were developed., Methods: An expert panel of infectious disease (ID) specialists participated in a modified Delphi process with specific objectives: (1) conduct a review for CDAD and prevention; (2) develop statements based upon panel members' opinions; (3) hold a panel meeting during the 2012 IDWeek; and (4) review the final recommendations and prevention pathway prior to submission for publication., Results: The panel voted on (1) antibiotic stewardship (7 of 8 panelists); (2) reduction of other potentially modifiable risk factors (variable); (3) utilization of specific probiotics to prevent C. difficile overgrowth (8/8); (4) staff education regarding CDAD preventive measures (8/8); (5) appropriate hand hygiene for everyone (7/8); (6) environmental cleaning (8/8); (7) medical equipment disinfection (7/8); (8) early detection of CDAD in symptomatic patients (7/8); (9) usage of protective clothing/gloves (8/8); (10) proper measures during outbreak (8/8); and (11) surveillance to monitor efficacy data of preventive measures (8/8)., Conclusions: The panel members agreed with 11 of 17 recommendations presented. The additional recommendations by the panel were proton pump inhibitor use as a risk factor and the use of adjunctive therapy with specific probiotic, as it was approved by Health Canada for the risk reduction of CDAD in hospitalized patients., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of Lactobacillus reuteri DSM 17938 for the treatment of infantile colic in breastfed Canadian infants, compared with placebo., Study Design: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted involving 52 infants with colic, according to modified Wessel criteria, who were assigned at random to receive L reuteri DSM 17938 (10(8) colony-forming units) (n = 24) or placebo (n = 28) for 21 days. Daily crying and fussing times were recorded in a structured diary, and maternal questionnaires were completed to monitor changes in infant colic symptoms and adverse events., Results: Total average crying and fussing times throughout the study (from baseline to day 21) were significantly shorter among infants with colic in the probiotic group compared with infants in the placebo group (1719 ± 750 minutes [29 ± 13 hours] vs 2195 ± 764 minutes [37 ± 13 hours]; P = .028) (relative risk, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58-0.98). Infants given L reuteri DSM 17938 showed a significant reduction in daily crying and fussing times at the end of treatment period compared with those receiving placebo (median, 60 minutes/day [IQR, 64 minutes/day] vs 102 minutes/day [IQR, 87 minutes/day]; P = .045). On day 21, a significantly higher proportion of infants in the L reuteri DSM 17938 group responded to treatment with a ≥50% crying time reduction compared with infants given placebo (17 vs 6, P = .035; relative risk, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.55-7.03)., Conclusion: Administration of L reuteri DSM 17938 significantly improved colic symptoms by reducing crying and fussing times in breastfed Canadian infants with colic., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Probiotics are microorganisms exerting beneficial effects on the host. They can be ingested through foods or supplements and their inclusion in these products is regulated in Canada by the Health Canada Health Products and Food Branch. The aim of this article is to summarize current evidence from randomized controlled trials and guidelines from Health Canada, the World Health Organization, and internationally recognized expert committees in the hope that it will help practitioners and professionals recommending probiotics to healthy and diseased patients, with a focus on the Canadian setting. From a general perspective, probiotics can be recommended for prevention of diseases that are associated to altered intestinal ecology. Specifically, they can be recommended for prevention of upper respiratory tract infections and pouchitis, for prevention and management of necrotizing enterocolitis, bacterial vaginosis and antibiotic associated diarrhea, including Clostridium difficile infection, and for treatment of atopic eczema in cow's milk allergy and of infectious diarrhea. Additional substantiated probiotic benefits include prevention of hypercholesterolemia, management of constipation, reduction of recurrent urinary tract infections, improvement of irritable bowel syndrome symptoms, and reduction of antibiotics side effects in Helicobacter pylori eradication. Because probiotics are generally recognized as safe and can be removed with antimicrobial agents, their use should be considered in patients of all ages.

Background: The burden of acute gastroenteritis on children and their families continues to be enormous. Probiotics, defined as viable microbial preparations that have a beneficial effect on the health of the host, represent a rapidly expanding field. Although clinical trials in children with gastroenteritis have been performed, most have significant flaws, and guidelines do not consistently endorse their use., Methods/design: PROGUT is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, five-center, Canadian, emergency department trial. Children aged 3 months to 48 months who present between November 2013 and June 2017 with <72 hours of gastroenteritis symptoms will be assessed for eligibility. A total of 886 children will be randomized (1:1 allocation via an internet based, third party, randomization service) to receive 5 days of a combination probiotic agent (Lactobacillus rhamnosus and L. helveticus) or placebo. All participants, caregivers, and outcome assessors will be blinded to group assignment. The study includes three key outcomes: 1) clinical - the development of moderate to severe disease following an emergency department (ED) evaluation that employs a validated clinical score (Modified Vesikari Scale); 2) safety - side effect; and 3) mechanism - fecal secretory immunoglobulin A levels., Discussion: Definitive data are lacking to guide the clinical use of probiotics in children with acute gastroenteritis. Hence, probiotics are rarely prescribed by North American physicians. However, the following current trends obligate an urgent assessment: 1) probiotics are sold as food supplements, and manufacturers can encourage their use while their relevance has yet to be established; 2) North American and European government agencies remain concerned about their value and safety; 3) some institutions are now recommending the routine use of probiotics; and 4) parents of affected children are often providing probiotics. With probiotic consumption increasing in the absence of solid evidence, there is a need to conduct this definitive trial to overcome the limitations of prior work in this field., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01853124; first registered 9 May 2013.

Probiotics, defined as 'live microorganisms, which when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host', are finally becoming an option for gastroenterologists in Canada, after being available for many years in Japan, Europe and the United States of America. Unfortunately, Health Canada and the US Food and Drug Administration have not controlled the use of the term 'probiotic' or put into place United Nations and World Health Organization guidelines. The net result is that a host of products called 'probiotics' are available but are not truly probiotic. The aim of the present review was to discuss the rationale for probiotics in gastroenterology, and specifically examine which products are options for physicians in Canada, and which ones patients might be using. It is hoped that by clarifying what probiotics are, and the strengths and limitations of their use, specialists will be better placed to make recommendations on the role of these products in patient care. In due course, more clinically documented probiotics will emerge, some with therapeutic effects based on a better understanding of disease processes.

While chronic constipation (CC) has a high prevalence in primary care, there are no existing treatment recommendations to guide health care professionals. To address this, a consensus group of 10 gastroenterologists was formed to develop treatment recommendations. Although constipation may occur as a result of organic disease, the present paper addresses only the management of primary CC or constipation associated with irritable bowel syndrome. The final consensus group was assembled and the recommendations were created following the exact process outlined by the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology for the following areas: epidemiology, quality of life and threshold for treatment; definitions and diagnostic criteria; lifestyle changes; bulking agents and stool softeners; osmotic agents; prokinetics; stimulant laxatives; suppositories; enemas; other drugs; biofeedback and behavioural approaches; surgery; and probiotics. A treatment algorithm was developed by the group for CC and constipation associated with irritable bowel syndrome. Where possible, an evidence-based approach and expert opinions were used to develop the statements in areas with insufficient evidence. The nature of the underlying pathophysiology for constipation is often unclear, and it can be tricky for physicians to decide on an appropriate treatment strategy for the individual patient. The myriad of treatment options available to Canadian physicians can be confusing; thus, the main aim of the recommendations and treatment algorithm is to optimize the approach in clinical care based on available evidence.

Objective: To define the term probiotics, to indicate how to identify products that have been proven beneficial, and to assess the quality of evidence regarding probiotics., Quality of Evidence: A few level I studies support the effectiveness of specific probiotics for certain diagnoses. For most so-called probiotics, however, weak or no evidence supports their effectiveness., Main Message: Probiotics are live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host. Level I evidence supports use of VSL#3 for maintaining remission of inflammatory colitis. Probiotics for treating vaginal infections, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GR-1 and Lactobacillus reuteri RC-14, have level I evidence of effectiveness, but are not available in Canada. Specific probiotics taken for certain indications improve health and have few side effects., Conclusion: Limited but good evidence supports the role of certain probiotics in medical practice. Because consumer pressure will undoubtedly stimulate further interest in probiotics, family doctors need to be informed about them so they can advise their patients appropriately.

Lactose maldigestion is a common genetic trait in up to 70% of the world's population. In these subjects, the ingestion of lactose may lead to prebiotic effects which can be confirmed by measurement of breath hydrogen. After a period of continuous lactose ingestion, colonic bacterial adaptation is measurable as improved parameters of lactose digestion. There may be inherent benefits in this process of adaptation which may protect against some diseases. We attempt to link therapeutically beneficial probiotics (VSL3, Seaford Pharmaceuticals Inc, Ontario) with improvement in parameters of lactose maldigestion. Two groups of five subjects with maldigestion were fed one or four packets of VSL3 (one packet containing 450 x 10(9) live bacteria) before testing and then 17 days later. A 50 g lactose challenge was carried out before and after feeding. While there was a trend toward increasing rather than reducing of summed breath hydrogen, no statistically significant changes were observed between results from before testing and those from testing 17 days later. The authors conclude that direct consumption of the probiotic VSL3 may not improve parameters of lactose maldigestion without metabolic activation. In its present format, therefore, the test for colonic adaptation cannot be used to demonstrate direct bacterial embedding with VSL3.

Considering the enormity of the problem in terms of women infected per year, urogenital infections receive far too little attention from scientists, government funding agencies, and the pharmaceutical industry. A recent resurgence in interest among clinicians is a result of consumer demands for better therapies, problems resulting from drug resistance, and the prospect of new diagnostics and treatments on the horizon. It is now recognized that the intestinal and urogenital microflora are critical for the health and well-being of humans. The concept of replenishing these flora with probiotic organisms seems to be an option that has a growing scientific basis. Although few strains have been selected and targeted for urogenital applications, and none are currently available on the market, evidence shows that probiotic therapy has the potential to make an impact on women's health.