Research Paper Volume 14, Issue 17 pp 7014—7025
Probiotics treatment for Parkinson disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials
- 1 Department of Neurology, Shuang-Ho Hospital, Taipei Medical University, New Taipei City, Taiwan
- 2 Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- 3 School of Nursing, College of Nursing, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- 4 Department of Nursing, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- 5 Center for Nursing and Healthcare Research in Clinical Practice Application, Wan Fang Hospital, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
- 6 Cochrane Taiwan, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan
Received: May 20, 2022 Accepted: August 24, 2022 Published: September 9, 2022https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.204266
How to Cite
Copyright: © 2022 Hong et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Background and aims: People with Parkinson disease (PwP) exhibit gut dysbiosis and considerable gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms. Probiotics, beneficial strains of microorganisms, supplement and optimize the intestinal environment and alleviate GI symptoms among elderly people. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials to investigate the effects of probiotics on PwP.
Methods: We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Major outcomes were the effects on GI symptoms, including bowel movement and stool characteristics. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021262036).
Results: Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and two open-label studies were included. Most of the probiotic regimens were based on Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium. Six studies investigated the benefit of probiotics for GI symptoms, especially for PwP with functional constipation, and two RCTs assessed probiotics’ effect on systematic metabolism and inflammation. In the meta-analysis, probiotic treatment significantly increased the frequency of bowel movements among PwP (mean difference [MD]: 1.06 /week, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61 to 1.51, p < 0.001, I2 = 40%). Additionally, probiotic treatment significantly normalized stool consistency (standard MD: 0.61, 95% CI = 0.31 to 0.91, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%).
Conclusions: Although the probiotic compositions varied, probiotic treatment significantly attenuated constipation for PwP and exhibited possible systematic effects on inflammation and metabolism. Given the tolerability of probiotics, the present meta-analysis may provide more consolidated evidence of the benefit of probiotics on constipation in PwP and a possible new therapeutic approach for disease modification.