益生菌预防婴幼儿抗生素相关性腹泻的前瞻性随机对照研究OA北大核心CSTPCDMEDLINE
A prospective randomized controlled study on probiotics for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea in infants and young children
目的 评价布拉氏酵母菌散及双歧杆菌四联活菌片对婴幼儿抗生素相关性腹泻(antibiotic-associated diarrhea,AAD)的预防作用.方法 选取2023年7-12月因非胃肠道感染入住徐州医科大学附属医院儿科并需抗生素治疗的3岁以下患儿作为研究对象,采用随机数字表法随机分为对照组(n=47)、布拉氏酵母菌组(n=70)、双歧杆菌组(n=65).对照组根据相关诊疗规范应用抗生素及对症支持治疗.除对照组采用的治疗外,布拉氏酵母菌组和双歧杆菌组分别加用布拉氏酵母菌散和双歧杆菌四联活菌片治疗,并根据益生菌使用时间将布拉氏酵母菌组分为布拉氏酵母菌7 d、14 d、21 d组和双歧杆菌7 d、14 d、21 d组.比较各组患儿应用抗生素后AAD发生率和粪便球菌与杆菌比例.结果 布拉氏酵母菌组和双歧杆菌组的AAD发生率均低于对照组(P<0.017).布拉氏酵母菌组和双歧杆菌组AAD持续时间和住院时间均短于对照组(P<0.05).对照组在第7天、14天、21天的粪便球菌与杆菌比例均高于第1天(P<0.05).组内比较显示,双歧杆菌14 d组、21 d组在治疗第14天的粪便球菌与杆菌比例低于第1天(P<0.05);对照组、布拉酵母菌14 d组、布拉酵母菌21 d组、双歧杆菌14 d组、双歧杆菌21 d组在治疗第14天的粪便球菌与杆菌比例低于第7天(P<0.05);对照组、布拉氏酵母菌21 d组在治疗第21天时粪便球菌与杆菌比例低于第7天及第14天(P<0.05).组别间比较显示,第7天时,布拉氏酵母菌7 d、14 d、21 d组以及双歧杆菌7 d、14 d、21 d组粪便球菌与杆菌比例均低于对照组(P<0.05);第14天时,双歧杆菌14 d组和21 d组粪便球菌与杆菌比例均低于对照组和双歧杆菌7 d组(P<0.05).结论 布拉氏酵母菌和双歧杆菌四联活菌均能有效改善肠道菌群,预防婴幼儿AAD的发生;与短期治疗相比,适当延长益生菌疗程可进一步改善肠道菌群结构.
Objective To evaluate the preventive effects of Saccharomyces boulardii powder and tetragenous viable Bifidobacterium tablets on antibiotic-associated diarrhea(AAD)in infants and young children.Methods Children under three years old admitted to the Department of Pediatrics,Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University due to non-gastrointestinal infections and requiring antibiotic treatment from July to December 2023 were enrolled.The children were randomly divided into a control group(n=47),a Saccharomyces boulardii group(n=70),and a Bifidobacterium group(n=65)using a random number table method.The control group received antibiotics and symptomatic supportive treatment according to relevant clinical guidelines.In addition to the treatment given to the control group,the Saccharomyces boulardii group and the Bifidobacterium group were respectively administered with Saccharomyces boulardii powder and tetragenous viable Bifidobacterium tablets.Based on the duration of probiotic use(7 days,14 days,and 21 days),the Saccharomyces boulardii group was further divided into 7 d,14 d,and 21 d subgroups,and similarly for the Bifidobacterium group.The incidence of AAD and ratio of cocci to bacilli in feces were compared among the groups after treatment.Results The incidence rate of AAD in both the Saccharomyces boulardii group and the Bifidobacterium group was lower than that in the control group(P<0.017).The duration of AAD and the length of hospital stay were shorter in the Saccharomyces boulardii and Bifidobacterium groups compared to the control group(P<0.05).In the control group,the ratio of cocci to bacilli in feces on days 7,14,and 21 was higher than on day 1(P<0.05).Within-group comparisons showed that the ratio of cocci to bacilli in feces on day 14 in the Bifidobacterium 14 d and 21 d groups were lower than on day 1(P<0.05);and the ratios on day 14 in the control group,Saccharomyces boulardii 14 d group,Saccharomyces boulardii 21 d group,Bifidobacterium 14 d group,and Bifidobacterium 21 d group were lower than on day 7(P<0.05).The ratios on day 21 in the control group and the Saccharomyces boulardii 21 d group were lower than on days 7 and 14(P<0.05).Between-group comparisons indicated that on day 7,the ratios of cocci to bacilli in feces in the Saccharomyces boulardii 7 d,14 d,21 d groups,and Bifidobacterium 7 d,14 d,21 d groups were all lower than in the control group(P<0.05);on day 14,the ratios of cocci to bacilli in feces 14 d and 21 d groups were lower than in the control group and the Bifidobacterium 7 d group(P<0.05).Conclusions Both Saccharomyces boulardii and tetragenous viable Bifidobacterium can effectively improve gut microbiota and prevent the occurrence of AAD in infants and young children.Compared to short-term treatment,appropriately extending the duration of probiotic therapy can further improve the structure of gut microbiota.
张苏薇;智娴;王梦雨;沈栋林
徐州医科大学附属医院儿科消化病区,江苏徐州 221000
抗生素相关性腹泻益生菌肠道菌群球菌与杆菌比例婴幼儿
Antibiotic-associated diarrheaProbioticsGut microbiotaRatio of cocci to bacilliInfant and young child
《中国当代儿科杂志》 2024 (010)
1108-1114 / 7
评论