MVIIIHealth The MVIII app
← Back

Research · Supplements

Probiotics

Cochrane reviews found probiotics given with antibiotics lowered C. difficile and antibiotic-associated diarrhea. Added to H. pylori treatment, they raised cure rates and cut side effects. IBS symptom scores fell modestly. Bowel movements did not rise in children with constipation. Probiotic strains have entered the blood of ICU patients and preterm infants.

Add to Bio HackChecked 2026-11-12
Status
Dietary supplement or food in the US. The FDA states it has not approved any probiotic as a drug or biologic for infants.
Also called
Lactobacillus, Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG, LGG, Bifidobacterium, Saccharomyces boulardii, Streptococcus thermophilus, live cultures, multi-strain probiotics, synbiotics
Taken for
gut health, diarrhea from antibiotics, C. difficile, IBS, constipation, immunity, colds, digestion, bloating, recovery after antibiotics, H. pylori treatment, ulcerative colitis, Crohn's disease, inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatoid arthritis, autoimmune disease, inflammation, mood, depression, anxiety, weight loss, skin aging, skin hydration, wrinkles

Strong several reviews agree · Moderate one review or consistent trials · Limited one or a few small studies · Untested no study in people, listed with what it rests on

Shown to help10

Reported risks4

What people take it for, and what was found

Shown to help10

Strong

Side effects and cure rates during H. pylori treatment

Shown to cut side effects during H. pylori treatment about in half with S. boulardii, and to raise cure rates slightly, 1 more per 18 treated.

The numbers and sources
Effect
Added to eradication therapy, Saccharomyces boulardii raised eradication in 15 adult RCTs (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.10, number needed to treat 18) and cut overall adverse events from 36.0% to 19.7% (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.66) [1]. With bismuth quadruple therapy, 11 RCTs (2,295 patients) found higher eradication (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.18) and fewer adverse events (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.74) [2]. Lactobacillus added to therapy raised eradication in 32 RCTs (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.14) and lowered adverse events (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.84) [3]. A review of 14 Lactobacillus RCTs found higher eradication (RR 1.04) and less diarrhea (RR 0.45), with no significant change in other side effects [4].
Population
Adults and children with H. pylori infection [1][3]. Adults [2][4].
Sources
[1], [2], [3], [4]
Caveats
Certainty was low for adverse events in [1]. Eradication gains with Lactobacillus appeared only with triple therapy [3]. The Lactobacillus reviews disagree on side effects other than diarrhea [3][4].
Moderate

C. difficile diarrhea during antibiotics

Shown to halve C. difficile diarrhea during antibiotics, 1.6% against 3.2%, with benefit only where baseline risk was above 5% in one analysis.

The numbers and sources
Effect
In the 2025 Cochrane update, 38 trials (13,179 participants) found C. difficile-associated diarrhea in 1.6% on probiotics and 3.2% on control (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.64, low certainty, number needed to treat 65) [11]. The 2017 version found 1.5% against 4.0% in 31 trials (RR 0.40) [12]. In its trials with baseline risk above 5%, rates were 3.1% versus 11.6% (RR 0.30), and trials with baseline risk of 5% or less showed no difference [12]. A 2025 review of 4 studies in hospitalized patients found no significant difference (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.7) [13].
Population
Adults and children on antibiotics, 47 studies with 15,260 participants [11]. Hospitalized patients, 4 studies [13].
Sources
[11], [12], [13]
Caveats
Detection of C. difficile in stool did not differ (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.11) [11]. 28 studies had authors linked to probiotic companies or company funding [11]. The baseline-risk subgroup in [12] was post hoc. The small hospital review had high heterogeneity [13].
Moderate

Antibiotic-associated diarrhea

Shown to lower antibiotic-associated diarrhea, from 19% to 8% in children and 27% to 23% overall, with low to moderate certainty.

The numbers and sources
Effect
Across 33 studies (6,352 children), antibiotic-associated diarrhea occurred in 8% on probiotics and 19% on control (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.56, I² 57%, number needed to treat 9, moderate certainty). At 5 billion CFU a day or more, rates were 8% versus 23% (RR 0.37) [14]. In 40 trials (13,419 adults and children), antibiotic-associated diarrhea occurred in 23% on probiotics and 27.4% on control (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.78, low certainty) [11].
Population
Children 0 to 18 on antibiotics [14]. Adults and children on antibiotics [11].
Sources
[14], [11]
Caveats
20 of 33 pediatric studies were at high risk of bias [14]. Certainty in [11] was downgraded for few events or publication bias.
Moderate

Ulcerative colitis

Shown to raise remission in active ulcerative colitis over placebo, with low certainty. Effect on keeping remission was uncertain.

The numbers and sources
Effect
A Cochrane review of 14 studies (865 participants) found more clinical remission in active disease on probiotics than placebo (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.54, 9 studies, 594 participants, low certainty, number needed to treat 5). Remission did not differ from 5-ASA (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.16, 1 study) [20]. For keeping remission, a Cochrane review of 12 studies (1,473 participants) found it uncertain whether relapse differed from placebo (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.18) and little or no difference from 5-ASA (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.22) [21].
Population
Mostly adults with mild to moderate ulcerative colitis [20][21].
Sources
[20], [21]
Caveats
Risk of bias was high in all but two or three studies in each review, and certainty ranged from moderate to very low [20][21].
Moderate

Irritable bowel syndrome

Shown to lower IBS symptom severity scores in adults, with effects differing by strain and no clear change in quality of life.

The numbers and sources
Effect
Across 40 RCTs, probiotics lowered the IBS symptom severity score by 33.42 points (95% CI 10.88 to 55.96) and did not significantly change IBS quality of life (MD 1.79, 95% CI -3.00 to 6.57) [24]. In 12 RCTs (1,303 patients), multistrain products lowered the score by 43.66 points (95% CI 21.44 to 65.89), and IBS-specific quality of life and abdominal pain scores did not change significantly [25]. A strain-level review found benefit for Bifidobacterium longum 35624, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum 299v, Saccharomyces cerevisiae CNCM I-3856 and Bacillus coagulans Unique IS2, and none for E. coli Nissle 1917, L. gasseri BNR17 or L. casei Shirota [26]. In 53 RCTs (5,545 patients), adverse events were no more common than placebo [27]. In children with IBS, 3 RCTs found less abdominal pain (SMD -0.95, 95% CI -1.63 to -0.27) [28].
Population
Adults with IBS [24][25][26][27]. 604 children in 6 RCTs [28].
Sources
[24], [25], [26], [27], [28]
Caveats
Certainty was low, mainly from inconsistency, and trial sequential analysis found the evidence had not reached the required information size [24]. Heterogeneity was 99% in [25]. Effects differ by strain [26][27].
Moderate

Depression and anxiety

Shown to lower depression and anxiety in adults with diagnosed disorders, with effect sizes varying widely. Anxiety did not change in children.

The numbers and sources
Effect
In clinically diagnosed samples, probiotics lowered depression (18 trials, SMD -0.96, 95% CI -1.31 to -0.61) and anxiety (9 trials, SMD -0.59, 95% CI -0.98 to -0.19) [29]. In 13 trials of major depression (710 patients), the pooled effect favored probiotics by an SMD of 0.38 [30]. A network meta-analysis put probiotics at SMD -0.62 against placebo in major depression [31]. A 2026 review found no significant effect in trials of 12 weeks or less and an effect in 2 longer trials [32]. In 7 RCTs of children and adolescents (912 participants), anxiety did not differ from placebo (SMD -0.09) [33].
Population
Adults with depression or anxiety disorders [29][30][31][32]. Children and adolescents [33].
Sources
[29], [30], [31], [32], [33]
Caveats
Effect sizes differ more than twofold between reviews, and heterogeneity was high [29][32].
ModerateStudied in children

Late-onset sepsis in preterm infants

Shown to lower late-onset sepsis confirmed by culture about 17% in preterm infants in hospital, with shorter stays.

The numbers and sources
Effect
In 31 studies (8,040 preterm infants of 36 weeks or less), probiotics lowered culture-proven late-onset sepsis (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.95). Hospital stays were shorter, and mortality trended lower without reaching significance [42].
Population
Preterm infants in hospital [42].
Sources
[42]
Caveats
One meta-analysis. Probiotic sepsis and the FDA warning on preterm products are listed under Risks.
Limited

C. difficile recurrence alongside treatment

One trial found fewer C. difficile recurrences, 1.7% against 13.1%, when S. boulardii was added to vancomycin.

The numbers and sources
Effect
In 120 patients with mild to moderate C. difficile infection treated with vancomycin, 500 mg of Saccharomyces boulardii twice a day for 10 days did not change clinical cure (98.4% against 98.3%) and lowered recurrence (1.7% against 13.1%) compared with placebo [43].
Population
120 patients with toxin-positive C. difficile infection [43].
Sources
[43]
Caveats
One trial. Adverse events did not differ [43].
Limited

Skin aging, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum HY7714

One trial found better skin hydration, elasticity and wrinkle depth than placebo with L. plantarum HY7714 in middle-aged adults with dry skin.

The numbers and sources
Effect
In 110 adults aged 41 to 59 with dry skin and wrinkles, 1 × 10^10 CFU a day of L. plantarum HY7714 for 12 weeks raised skin water content on the face (p < 0.01) and hands (p < 0.05), reduced water loss on the face and forearm more than placebo, and reduced wrinkle depth. Elasticity improved by 13.17% at 4 weeks (p < 0.05 against controls) and by 21.73% at 12 weeks (p < 0.01) [44].
Population
110 volunteers [44].
Sources
[44]
Caveats
One trial of one strain. The authors call the findings preliminary [44].
LimitedStudied in women

Sensitive skin and barrier recovery, Lacticaseibacillus paracasei NCC 2461 (ST11)

One trial found lower skin sensitivity and faster skin barrier recovery than placebo in women taking L. paracasei NCC 2461 for 2 months.

The numbers and sources
Effect
In 64 women, 2 months of L. paracasei NCC 2461 lowered skin sensitivity to capsaicin and sped recovery of skin barrier function, measured as water loss, against placebo [46].
Population
Two groups of 32 women [46].
Sources
[46]
Caveats
One trial of one strain. The abstract gives no effect sizes [46].

Mixed results5

Moderate

Rheumatoid arthritis

Mixed results: reviews agree probiotics lower CRP or IL-6 in rheumatoid arthritis, but disagree on disease activity.

The numbers and sources
Effect
Across 9 studies (361 patients), probiotics lowered IL-6 (SMD -0.708) and did not change disease activity scores (MD 0.023, 95% CI -0.584 to 0.631) [8]. Across 4 RCTs (153 participants), DAS fell (SMD -0.58, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.19), CRP fell borderline (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.65 to 0.00), and ESR and cytokines did not change [9]. A review of 8 RA trials (344 patients) found CRP 3.04 mg/L lower (95% CI -4.47 to -1.62). With high risk-of-bias trials excluded, DAS28 did not differ from placebo (SMD -0.54, 95% CI -1.94 to 0.85) [10].
Population
Adults with rheumatoid arthritis, mostly women, over 8 weeks to 1 year [8][9][10].
Sources
[8], [9], [10]
Caveats
The reviews agree on lower CRP or IL-6 and disagree on disease activity. Strains, doses and durations varied [10].
Moderate

Upper respiratory infections

Mixed results: one review found fewer respiratory infections and shorter episodes, while a later review found no significant drop in infections.

The numbers and sources
Effect
Across 23 trials (6,950 children, adults and older people), probiotics reduced the number with at least one infection (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.87, low certainty) and at least three infections (RR 0.59, moderate certainty), shortened episodes by 1.22 days (95% CI -2.12 to -0.33), and reduced antibiotic use (RR 0.58) [15]. A 2026 review of 32 RCTs found no significant pooled drop in infection incidence (risk difference -0.07, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.09), while some strains shortened symptoms and cut antibiotic use [16]. Across 13 RCTs of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG, respiratory episodes fell (MD -0.14, 95% CI -0.27 to -0.01) [17].
Population
People in community, care facilities, schools and hospitals [15]. RCTs of oral or topical probiotics [16]. People given LGG for prevention or treatment [17].
Sources
[15], [16], [17]
Caveats
Most outcomes were low certainty [15]. Heterogeneity in [16] was very high (I² 93%) and certainty very low. The reviews disagree on incidence.
Moderate

Acute infectious diarrhea

Mixed results: low-bias trials found no change in diarrhea risk or duration, while Chinese trials found S. boulardii shortened gastroenteritis in children.

The numbers and sources
Effect
In trials at low risk of bias, probiotics did not change the risk of diarrhea lasting 48 hours or more (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09, 2 trials, 1,770 participants) or diarrhea duration (MD 8.64 hours shorter, 95% CI 29.4 hours shorter to 12.1 hours longer, very low certainty) [18]. A 2025 review of 10 Chinese trials (1,125 children) found Saccharomyces boulardii CNCM I-745 shortened acute gastroenteritis (SMD -1.63, 95% CI -2.08 to -1.18) and raised the cure rate (RR 1.47) [19].
Population
82 studies, 12,127 participants, mostly children [18]. Children in China receiving rehydration therapy [19].
Sources
[18], [19]
Caveats
Publication bias appeared on funnel plots, and heterogeneity was marked across all studies [18]. The reviews disagree. The S. boulardii review found no eligible trials outside Chinese databases [19].
Moderate

Body weight in overweight and obesity

Mixed results: several reviews found about 1.2 kg lower weight with Lactobacillus strains in adults with overweight, while one found no significant change.

The numbers and sources
Effect
Lactiplantibacillus plantarum lowered body weight by 1.23 kg (95% CI 0.49 to 1.97, 18 RCTs, 1,310 adults) [34] and 1.20 kg (95% CI 0.48 to 1.92, 17 RCTs) [35], and waist by 1.36 cm in both. Lactobacillus species lowered weight 1.16 kg (95% CI 0.53 to 1.79, 12 trials, 1,058 people) [36]. A network meta-analysis of 47 studies (3,555 people) found the largest drops, 2.83 and 2.14 kg, with two multi-genus mixes [37]. A 2026 review of 10 RCTs (633 adults) found no significant change in body weight (SMD -0.44, 95% CI -0.92 to 0.04) and a BMI drop that weakened in sensitivity analysis [38].
Population
Adults with overweight or obesity [34][35][36][37][38]. Three reviews excluded people with diabetes or other conditions [34][35][36].
Sources
[34], [35], [36], [37], [38]
Caveats
The reviews disagree on whether weight changes. Effects differ by strain, and certainty ranged from low to high across outcomes [34][37].
Moderate

Skin hydration and water loss, pooled across strains

Mixed results: one review found better skin hydration, water loss and wrinkles, while another found no benefit on skin water content.

The numbers and sources
Effect
Across 15 RCTs (867 healthy adults), oral probiotics raised skin hydration (5 RCTs, 402 people, SMD 1.208, 95% CI 0.410 to 2.006, I² 87.5%), lowered transepidermal water loss (6 RCTs, 453 people, SMD -1.165, 95% CI -1.402 to -0.927) and lowered wrinkle scores (4 RCTs, 287 people, SMD -1.299, 95% CI -1.736 to -0.863) against placebo. The effect on elasticity was inconclusive (2 RCTs, SMD 0.930, 95% CI -0.179 to 2.039) [39]. A 2022 meta-analysis of oral supplement trials found no benefit of lactic acid bacteria or Lactobacillus fermented foods on skin water content or transepidermal water loss [40]. A 2025 meta-analysis of 61 diet and supplement studies found that prebiotics and probiotics together improved hydration (pSMD 0.71, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.16) [41].
Population
Healthy adults [39][40]; participants in 61 human studies [41].
Sources
[39], [40], [41]
Caveats
These reviews pool different strains, so their estimates do not describe any one strain. The reviews disagree. The 2026 authors note frequent industry sponsorship, possible publication bias and certainty from very low to moderate [39].

Not shown to help3

StrongStudied in children

Constipation in children

Not shown to increase bowel movements in children with functional constipation compared with placebo or standard treatment.

The numbers and sources
Effect
In a network meta-analysis of 41 RCTs, probiotics did not increase weekly bowel movements compared with placebo or any conventional treatment [5]. A second network meta-analysis of 15 RCTs (1,087 children) found no difference from placebo in weekly bowel movements for any probiotic, prebiotic or synbiotic [6]. An umbrella review found no effect on stool frequency (WMD 0.22, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.74) [7].
Population
Children with functional constipation [5][6]. Children in pooled meta-analyses [7].
Sources
[5], [6], [7]
Caveats
Confidence in the network estimates ranged from very low to moderate [5][6]. Adults were not studied in these reviews.
Moderate

Crohn's disease

Not shown to bring or keep remission in Crohn's disease, in very small studies.

The numbers and sources
Effect
A Cochrane review of 2 studies (46 participants) found no difference from placebo in inducing remission after 6 months (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.71, very low certainty) [22]. A Cochrane review of 7 small maintenance studies found no significant reduction in relapse with E. coli Nissle (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.20) or Lactobacillus GG after surgery (RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.30 to 8.40) or medical treatment (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.80) [23].
Population
Adults and children with Crohn's disease [22][23].
Sources
[22], [23]
Caveats
Studies were very small and could not be pooled for maintenance [23].
Limited

Wrinkles, heat-killed Lactobacillus acidophilus IDCC 3302

One trial found no benefit over placebo on wrinkles from heat-killed L. acidophilus IDCC 3302 in adults with crow's-feet.

The numbers and sources
Effect
In 100 adults with crow's-feet wrinkles, 12 weeks of heat-killed L. acidophilus IDCC 3302 (ID-ACT 3302) showed no benefit over placebo on the primary wrinkle endpoints. Hydration, water loss and most elasticity measures improved in both groups. One elasticity index (R2) differed between groups, which the authors call exploratory [45].
Population
100 healthy adults [45].
Sources
[45]
Caveats
Heat-killed bacteria, not live probiotics. Ildong Pharmaceutical funded the study and collaborated in its design and analysis, and one author is an employee [45].

Doses studied

In children on antibiotics, 5 billion CFU a day or more was associated with a larger effect than lower doses [14]. Respiratory trials mostly used one or two strains at 10^9 to 10^11 CFU a day for more than three months [15]. In H. pylori trials, the eradication gain with S. boulardii did not differ by dose or duration [1]. The C. difficile recurrence trial used 500 mg of S. boulardii twice a day for 10 days [43]. The L. plantarum HY7714 skin trial used 1 × 10^10 CFU a day for 12 weeks [44].

Risks

Reported risks4

LimitedHow often is not known

Bloodstream infection from the probiotic strain

Case reports: bloodstream infections matching the product strain occurred in ICU patients and 32 preterm infants, two of whom died.

The numbers and sources
How common
How often is not known: the sources give no rate.
Effect
ICU patients given probiotics had a markedly higher risk of Lactobacillus bacteremia than those not given them, and whole-genome sequencing found blood isolates inseparable from the product strain, one with an antibiotic resistance mutation [48]. A review of 16 reports found 32 preterm infants with probiotic sepsis, mostly Bifidobacterium (19) and Lactobacillus (10). 25 were confirmed as the administered strain, and two infants died [49].
Population
ICU patients at one center [48]; preterm infants under 37 weeks [49].
Sources
[48], [49]
Caveats
The authors of [49] describe probiotic sepsis as uncommon in preterm infants. The abstract of [48] does not give a rate.
LimitedStudied in childrenHow often is not known

FDA warning on preterm infants

FDA warned in 2023 that probiotics may pose serious risks to preterm infants in hospitals, citing one death and other adverse events.

The numbers and sources
How common
How often is not known: the sources give no rate.
Effect
In October 2023 the FDA warned that probiotics may pose serious risks to preterm infants in hospitals, citing one infant death in 2023 and more than two dozen other adverse events in the US since 2018. It issued a warning letter to Abbott over Similac Probiotic Tri-Blend [50].
Population
Hospitalized preterm infants [50].
Sources
[50]
Caveats
A regulatory statement, not a trial.
LimitedHow often is not known

Slower gut recovery after antibiotics

One study in mice and people found a multi-strain probiotic delayed the gut microbiome's return after antibiotics, compared with spontaneous recovery.

The numbers and sources
How common
How often is not known: the sources give no rate.
Effect
After antibiotics, a multi-strain probiotic delayed and left incomplete the return of the native stool and mucosal microbiome compared with spontaneous recovery, in mice and humans. Autologous fecal transplant restored it within days [51].
Population
Mice and human volunteers. The abstract does not give the number of people [51].
Sources
[51]
Caveats
Microbiome measures, not clinical outcomes.
ModerateHow often is not known

Incomplete harms reporting

Of 384 probiotic trials, 28% reported no harms data and 80% did not give serious adverse events per group.

The numbers and sources
How common
How often is not known: the sources give no rate.
Effect
Of 384 RCTs of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics, 28% reported no harms data, 37% gave no safety results, and 80% did not give serious adverse events per group [47].
Population
Trials published 2015 to 2018 [47].
Sources
[47]
Caveats
The authors conclude that safety cannot be broadly inferred without reported safety data [47].

Checked, no increase found1

Moderate

Adverse events in antibiotic trials

Adverse events were about as common on probiotics as on control during antibiotics, 10.9% against 12.2%.

The numbers and sources
How common
Very common: more than 1 in 10 people.
Effect
In 37 trials (11,911 participants) on antibiotics, adverse events occurred in 10.9% on probiotics and 12.2% on control (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.01, moderate certainty). The most common in both groups were abdominal cramping, nausea, fever, soft stools, flatulence and taste disturbance [11].
Population
Adults and children receiving antibiotics [11].
Sources
[11]
Caveats
Certainty was downgraded for variation between studies [11]. Trials with incomplete harms reporting are described below [47].

Claims tested and not found

  1. That probiotics shorten acute infectious diarrhea. In low risk-of-bias trials, diarrhea lasting 48 hours or more did not differ from control (RR 1.00) [18].
  2. That probiotics speed microbiome recovery after antibiotics. A multi-strain product delayed recovery compared with no treatment [51].
  3. That probiotics increase bowel movements in children with constipation. Two network meta-analyses found no difference from placebo in weekly bowel movements [5][6].
  4. That probiotics bring Crohn's disease into remission or keep it there. Remission did not differ from placebo (RR 1.06) [22], and no maintenance comparison showed a significant reduction in relapse [23].
  5. That heat-killed L. acidophilus IDCC 3302 reduces crow's-feet wrinkles. The primary wrinkle endpoints showed no benefit over placebo after 12 weeks [45].

Sources

  1. Chang HK, Shi LB, Song HX, et al. Saccharomyces boulardii as an Adjunct to Helicobacter pylori Eradication Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Digestive Diseases. 2026. https://doi.org/10.1111/1751-2980.70071
  2. Ma F, Huang H, Tian K, Wang W. Efficacy and Safety of Saccharomyces Boulardii with Standard Quadruple Therapy for Eradication of Helicobacter Pylori in Adults: Meta-Analysis. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan. 2025. https://doi.org/10.29271/jcpsp.2025.11.1440
  3. Moore KMH, Santo P, Holanda EU, et al. Effectiveness of Lactobacillus-supplemented eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 2026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-026-04186-5
  4. Azam A, Qureshi MAM, Zahoor HS, et al. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on the Benefits of Using Lactobacillus Supplements as an Adjunct Treatment for Helicobacter pylori Eradication. MicrobiologyOpen. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1002/mbo3.70166
  5. Harris RG, Neale EP, Batterham M. Efficacy of Probiotics Compared With Pharmacological Treatments for Maintenance Therapy for Functional Constipation in Children: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. Nutrition Reviews. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuae119
  6. Liang C, Deng X, Wang H, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Probiotics, Prebiotics and Synbiotics for the Treatment of Functional Constipation in Children: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins. 2026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-026-10955-6
  7. Chen L, Wang Y, Liu X, et al. Probiotics for pediatric diarrhea and constipation: an umbrella meta-analysis. BMC Pediatrics. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-025-06002-y
  8. Mohammed AT, Khattab M, Ahmed AM, et al. The therapeutic effect of probiotics on rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Clinical Rheumatology. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-017-3814-3
  9. Aqaeinezhad Rudbane SM, Rahmdel S, Abdollahzadeh SM, et al. The efficacy of probiotic supplementation in rheumatoid arthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Inflammopharmacology. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10787-017-0436-y
  10. Sanchez P, Letarouilly JG, Nguyen Y, et al. Efficacy of Probiotics in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Spondyloarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Nutrients. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14020354
  11. Esmaeilinezhad Z, Ghosh NR, Walsh CM, et al. Probiotics for the prevention of Clostridioides difficile-associated diarrhea in adults and children. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd006095.pub5
  12. Goldenberg JZ, Yap C, Lytvyn L, et al. Probiotics for the prevention of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in adults and children. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006095.pub4
  13. Almutawif YA, Najim MA, Khan NU. Evaluation of probiotics efficiency for the prevention of Clostridioides difficile infection in hospitalized patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Infection. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-025-02580-2
  14. Guo Q, Goldenberg JZ, Humphrey C, et al. Probiotics for the prevention of pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004827.pub5
  15. Zhao Y, Dong BR, Hao Q. Probiotics for preventing acute upper respiratory tract infections. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006895.pub4
  16. Azzi A, Alotaibi AS, Alamri MS, et al. The Efficacy of Probiotics in Treating Upper Respiratory Tract Infections, Allergic Rhinitis, and Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Microorganisms. 2026. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms14050986
  17. Zuhair MN, Wiriansya EP, Masyhuri I, et al. Role of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG in the Management of Respiratory Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Preventive Nutrition and Food Science. 2025. https://doi.org/10.3746/pnf.2025.30.3.222
  18. Collinson S, Deans A, Padua-Zamora A, et al. Probiotics for treating acute infectious diarrhoea. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003048.pub4
  19. McFarland LV, Li T. Efficacy and safety of Saccharomyces boulardii CNCM I-745 for the treatment of pediatric acute diarrhea in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology. 2025. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2025.1587792
  20. Kaur L, Gordon M, Baines PA, et al. Probiotics for induction of remission in ulcerative colitis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005573.pub3
  21. Iheozor-Ejiofor Z, Kaur L, Gordon M, et al. Probiotics for maintenance of remission in ulcerative colitis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007443.pub3
  22. Limketkai BN, Akobeng AK, Gordon M, Adepoju AA. Probiotics for induction of remission in Crohn's disease. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006634.pub3
  23. Rolfe VE, Fortun PJ, Hawkey CJ, Bath-Hextall FJ. Probiotics for maintenance of remission in Crohn's disease. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2006. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004826.pub2
  24. Tang ASP, Quek J, Sulaimi F, et al. Probiotics for Irritable Bowel Syndrome: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With Trial Sequential Analysis. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology. 2026. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.70322
  25. Anwar DFF, Salma ZN, Oktaviani SD, et al. Effect of multistrain probiotics on symptom severity in irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of irritable bowel syndrome-symptom severity score outcomes. European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1097/meg.0000000000003074
  26. Maslennikov R, Gosteeva E, Ananeva V, et al. Strain-Specific Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Probiotics Efficacy in the Treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2026. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15031152
  27. Ford AC, Harris LA, Lacy BE, et al. Systematic review with meta-analysis: the efficacy of prebiotics, probiotics, synbiotics and antibiotics in irritable bowel syndrome. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.15001
  28. Piccirillo M, Renzi E, De Vito C, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Probiotics in Children with Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Microorganisms. 2025. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms14010023
  29. Asad A, Kirk M, Zhu S, et al. Effects of Prebiotics and Probiotics on Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety in Clinically Diagnosed Samples: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Nutrition Reviews. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuae177
  30. Tam SY. Probiotics for major depressive disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. East Asian Archives of Psychiatry. 2026. https://doi.org/10.12809/eaap2643
  31. Zhao S, Liang S, Tao J, et al. Probiotics for adults with major depressive disorder compared with antidepressants: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Nutrition Reviews. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuad171
  32. Anjum N, Ahmed Z, Anjum F, et al. Efficacy of prebiotics, probiotics, and postbiotics on depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nutritional Neuroscience. 2026. https://doi.org/10.1080/1028415x.2026.2703621
  33. Wen YH, Liang SC, Sun CK, et al. Therapeutic Effects of Probiotics on Symptoms of Anxiety in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Placebo-Controlled Trials. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1177/10445463251399491
  34. Khattak MH, Abbas SA, Zaryab U, et al. Influence of Lactobacillus plantarum on anthropometric and inflammatory parameters in obesity: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. International Journal of Obesity. 2026. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-026-02221-0
  35. Cheng Z, Du L, Zheng W, et al. Efficacy of Lactobacillus plantarum on Body Composition, Lipid Profile, Liver Enzymes, and Inflammatory Markers in Overweight or Obese Adults: A GRADE Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials. Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins. 2026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-026-11137-0
  36. Lele JA, Sihaloho KB, Vighneswara D, et al. Probiotic Lactobacillus sp. as a strategy for modulation of non-comorbid obesity: A systematic meta-analysis and GRADE assessment of randomized controlled trials. Narra J. 2025. https://doi.org/10.52225/narra.v5i2.1562
  37. Chen X, Zhang Z, Wei D, et al. Comparative Efficacy of Probiotics for the Treatment of Obesity: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. Nutrition Reviews. 2026. https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuag048
  38. Ko J, Chun J, Yoo C, et al. Effects of probiotics and synbiotics on body weight management in individuals with overweight or obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Physical Activity and Nutrition. 2026. https://doi.org/10.20463/pan.2026.0025
  39. Nezhadpour A, Hemadi E, Roghanian M, et al. Oral Probiotics for Improving Skin Hydration, Elasticity, Transepidermal Water Loss, and Wrinkle Reduction in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology. 2026. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocd.71124
  40. Sun Q, Wu J, Qian G, Cheng H. Effectiveness of Dietary Supplement for Skin Moisturizing in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Frontiers in Nutrition. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2022.895192
  41. Ng JY, Yan Ng XMG, Wong QYA, Chew FT. Dietary interventions in skin ageing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Physiological Anthropology. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40101-025-00408-4
  42. Maulida R, Amandito R, Rohsiswatmo R, et al. Probiotics for preventing neonatal sepsis in preterm neonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis for clinical practice. Epidemiology and Health. 2025. https://doi.org/10.4178/epih.e2025051
  43. Chitapanarux T, Wiracha U, Winichakoon P, et al. Efficacy and safety of Saccharomyces boulardii as adjunct therapy with Vancomycin in treating Clostridioides difficile infection: A randomized controlled trial. Scientific Reports. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-04986-2
  44. Lee DE, Huh CS, Ra J, et al. Clinical Evidence of Effects of Lactobacillus plantarum HY7714 on Skin Aging: A Randomized, Double Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology. 2015. https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.1509.09021
  45. Kim H, Bang WY, Jeong KH, et al. Effects of Heat-Killed Lactobacillus acidophilus IDCC 3302 on Skin Aging Parameters: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial in Healthy Adults. Nutrients. 2026. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu18040596
  46. Gueniche A, Philippe D, Bastien P, et al. Randomised double-blind placebo-controlled study of the effect of Lactobacillus paracasei NCC 2461 on skin reactivity. Beneficial Microbes. 2014. https://doi.org/10.3920/BM2013.0001
  47. Bafeta A, Koh M, Riveros C, et al. Harms Reporting in Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions Aimed at Modifying Microbiota: A Systematic Review. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2018. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0343
  48. Yelin I, Flett KB, Merakou C, et al. Genomic and epidemiological evidence of bacterial transmission from probiotic capsule to blood in ICU patients. Nature Medicine. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-019-0626-9
  49. Kulkarni T, Majarikar S, Deshmukh M, et al. Probiotic sepsis in preterm neonates: a systematic review. European Journal of Pediatrics. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-022-04452-5
  50. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Raises Concerns About Probiotic Products Sold for Use in Hospitalized Preterm Infants. News release. 2023. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-raises-concerns-about-probiotic-products-sold-use-hospitalized-preterm-infants
  51. Suez J, Zmora N, Zilberman-Schapira G, et al. Post-Antibiotic Gut Mucosal Microbiome Reconstitution Is Impaired by Probiotics and Improved by Autologous FMT. Cell. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.08.047

Everything in the library