Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Lactobacillus reuteri therapy to reduce side-effects duringanti-Helicobacter pylori treatment in children: a randomizedplacebo controlled trial
E . L I O N E T T I * , V . L . M I N I E L L O * , S . P . C A S T E L L A N E T A , A . M . M A G I S T A´ * , A . D E C A N I O * ,
G . M A U R O G I O V A N N I à , E . I E R A R D I § , L . C A V A L L O * , – & R . F R A N C A V I L L A * , –
Helicobacter pylori eradication fails in about 25–30% of children,
particularly because of the occurrence of resistance to antibiotics and
To determine whether adding the Lactobacillus reuteri to an anti-H. pylori regimen could help to prevent or minimize the gastrointestinal
‘B. Trambusti’, Piazza Giulio Cesare,
Forty H. pylori-positive children (21 males; median age: 12.3 years) wereconsecutively treated with 10-day sequential therapy [omeprazole +
amoxycillin for 5 days, and omeprazole + clarithromycin + tinidazole
for other 5 days] and blindly randomized to receive either L. reuteri
ATCC 55730 (108 CFU) or placebo. All children completed the Gastroin-
testinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) at entry, during and after treat-
ment. H. pylori status was assessed after 8 weeks by 13C-urea breath test.
ResultsOverall, in all probiotic supplemented children when compared withthose receiving placebo there was a significant reduction of GSRS scoreduring eradication therapy (4.1 Æ 2 vs. 6.2 Æ 3; P < 0.01) and at theend of follow-up (3.2 Æ 2 vs. 5.8 Æ 3.4; P < 0.009). Overall, childrenreceiving L. reuteri report less symptoms than those receiving placebo.
ConclusionL. reuteri is capable of reducing frequency and intensity of antibiotic-associated side-effects during eradication therapy for H. pylori.
Journal compilation ª 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltddoi:10.1111/j.1365-2036.2006.03145.x
According to the North American Society for Paediat-
ric Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition guide-lines,1 one-week triple therapy represents the current
The study enrolled only patients at the first diagnosis
most widely used first-line regimen for Helicobacter
of H. pylori infection. A total of 42 consecutive symp-
pylori infection, but the eradication failure rate is
tomatic children [23 males (54.8%), median age
more than 30%.2 Today, bacterial resistance and side-
12.3 years (range: 3.3–18 years)] were candidates for
effect occurrence represent the second most frequent
inclusion in the study at the Department of Paediatric
cause for anti-H. pylori treatment failure in clinical
Gastroenterology of the University of Bari (Italy)
practise.3 Indeed, the high prevalence of antibiotic
between November 2004 and December 2005. Exclu-
side-effects might induce even motivated dyspeptic
sion criteria were one of the following: (i) consumption
patients to discontinue therapy, with a consequent
of PPI, H2 receptor antagonist, bismuth compounds,
treatment failure as well as a possible development
antibiotics, probiotics, in the previous 4 weeks, (ii)
of antibiotic-resistant strains.4 These manifestations
previous gastric surgery, (iii) known allergy to anti-
have been related to the quantitative and qualitative
biotics and (iv) acute or chronic gastrointestinal
changes in the intestinal microflora because of unab-
sorbed or secreted antibiotics in the intestinal contentwhich results in a reduction of normal saprophytic
flora, bacterial overgrowth and the persistence ofpotentially pathogenic antibiotic resistant indigenous
At baseline, patients underwent endoscopy with biop-
sies for histology (two samples from the antrum and
A strategy targeted to improve the treatment toler-
two samples from the corpus), and a rapid urease test
ability might increase compliance and eventually raise
(one sample from the antrum) (CP test; Yamanouchi
eradication rate. The use of probiotics has recently
Pharma S.p.A., Carugate, Italy). Endoscopy was per-
been proposed in adults to increase patient tolerability
formed by the same physician (R.F.) (endoscope model
by limiting side-effects of eradicating therapies;4, 6–9
GIF XP20; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) after sedation with
nonetheless, the report from the Maastricht 2000 con-
sensus conference on H. pylori include probiotics as
were carried out by the same observer using haema-
possible useful ‘side tools’ for management of the
toxylin–eosin staining for assessment of gastritis and
Gram stain for detection of H. pylori. Within 24 h of
Lactobacillus reuteri is a heterofermentative bacter-
the endoscopy, patients completed a standard 13C-urea
ium that resides in the gastrointestinal tract of humans
breath test (13C-UBT) after overnight fasting. A fatty
and animals11 and is considered to be one of the few
meal (100 mL) and a solution of 13C urea [75 mg 13C
true autochthonous Lactobacillus species in humans.12
urea (AB Analitica srl Padova, Italy)] were fed to each
L. reuteri has been shown to exert a beneficial effect
patient. Breath samples were collected before and
in the prevention and treatment of several intestinal
30 min after the dose of urea. In children <6 years of
age, breath samples were collected by using a face-
The demonstration that L. reuteri colonizes the
mask with a bag (made in house). The ratio of 13C to
12C in the expired air samples was measured using a
data that L. reuteri ATCC 55730 is a potent inhibitor
dual-inlet-ratio mass spectrometer (Automated Breath
of H. pylori growth14 prompted our study in chil-
13Carbon Analyzer; Europa Scientific, Ltd, Crawley,
West Sussex, UK). Results were expressed as parts per
We investigated, for the first time in a paediatric
million of excess of D13CO2 (by subtraction of the
population, in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-
baseline pretest breath sample). The presence of gastric
controlled trial the effect of L. reuteri on antibiotic-
urease activity was revealed by a change of 3.5 per
associated side-effects during and after H. pylori
thousand (or more) related to the baseline signal.15
13C-UBT, as described, had been validated in children
ª 2006 The Authors, Aliment Pharmacol Ther 24, 1461–1468Journal compilation ª 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
L . R E U T E R I A N D A N T I B I O T I C - A S S O C I A T E D S Y M P T O M S D U R I N G H . P Y L O R I E R A D I C A T I O N
of our geographic area by our group.16 In case of anti-
All children received a 10-day sequential therapy
biotic or antiacid medications, 13C-UBT was deferred
comprising of omeprazole (1 mg/kg/die) plus amoxy-
to at least 4 weeks. At entry, patients were considered
cillin (50 mg/kg/die) for 5 days followed by omepraz-
H. pylori positive if two of three tests (histology, rapid
ole (1 mg/kg/die) plus clarithromycin (15 mg/kg/die)
urease test, 13C-UBT) were positive.
and tinidazole (20 mg/kg/die) for the next 5 days;19omeprazole was prescribed before breakfast and din-ner, the antibiotics were administered after meals.
Patients were randomly assigned to receive either
According to current guidelines,1 only symptomatic
L. reuteri or placebo both provided by No´os (BioGaia,
children deserve anti-H. pylori treatment; therefore, in
Sweden) in pills form and included either L. reuteri
infancy studying the emergence of anti-H. pylori-rela-
(each pill containing 108 CFU of L. reuteri ATCC
ted side-effect as performed in adults, is unfeasible
55730 (SD2112), Reuterin, No´os) or placebo which
consisted of tablets identical in taste and appearance
All children (or family member) attended an inter-
to the active study product except for the absence of
view to recall history of GI symptoms and the follow-
freeze-dried L. reuteri (and cryoprotectants). Boxes
ing data were collected: (i) a detailed physical
containing placebo had the same shape, dimension,
examination, (ii) the 15-item Gastrointestinal Symptom
trade mark, indication and contained the same amount
Rating Scale (GSRS) to assess severity and frequency of
of sachets of boxes containing the viable L. reuteri
symptoms17 and (iii) questions to assess other variables
and were provided by the probiotic producer. Both
that may have affected study results (i.e. intercurrent
placebo and probiotics were prescribed one pill once
infections, life events). The following symptoms were
daily (2 h after lunch) for a period of 20 days.
specifically investigated: epigastric burning and/or
An independent physician prescribed either probiotic
pain, abdominal pain, acid regurgitation, heartburn,
or placebo according to a computer generated rand-
sucking sensation in the epigastrium, nausea, vomiting,
omization list, blindly to researchers. The code was
bloating, abdominal distension, eructation, increased
revealed to the researchers once recruitment, data col-
flatus, disorders of defecation [decreased/increased pas-
lection and laboratory analyses and statistical analyses
sage of stools, consistency of stools (loose/hard),
urgency, feeling of incomplete evacuation], inappe-
Patients were thoroughly instructed and motivated
tence, halitosis, taste disturbance and urticaria.
for the therapy. Adherence to treatment was evaluated
The symptoms were scored by the child (or family
by counting the pills returned by the subject; a mini-
member) on a four-point scale: mild (non-interfering
mum pill intake of 95% was considered as acceptable.
with daily activities), moderate (slightly interfering
Eight weeks after completion of therapy H. pylori
with daily activities), severe (interfering with daily
eradication was assessed by using a 13C-UBT. An
activities), very severe (continuous and if on therapy,
informed consent was obtained by all parents (or
producing treatment interruption). Stool consistency
guardian). The local Ethical Committee approved the
was graded from hard (0) to watery (4). A similar scale
has been used in paediatric populations with a 0.84inter-rater reliability in children.18 Data were collected
before (1 week before intervention), during (5th and10th day) and after completion of eradicating therapy
All data are expressed as median with a range. All
(15th and 20th day) and patients were invited to return
data analysis was carried out according to a pre-estab-
their diaries immediately after the intervention period.
lished analysis plan. The sample size was calculatedstarting from the assumption of having at least oneantibiotic-associated side-effects in at least 80% of the
treated children aiming to detect a difference in ameli-
In the current study we tested the hypothesis that
oration of symptom rate of 35%. Based on a 0.80
L. reuteri would reduce the rate of side-effects
power to detect significant difference (P ¼ 0.05, two
secondary to the use of antibiotics during H. pylori
sided), 20 patients were required for each arm. Propor-
tions were compared by using Chi-squared tests with
continuity correction or Fisher’s exact test when
ª 2006 The Authors, Aliment Pharmacol Ther 24, 1461–1468Journal compilation ª 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
appropriate; comparison of continuous variables was
was good (>95%) in all enrolled cases, and no patient
performed using Mann–Whitney test. The median
discontinued therapy because of side-effects. There
regression analysis was used to estimate difference
were no differences in adherence to treatment sched-
between adjusted medians with the baseline value as
covariate. A probability (P)-value <0.05 was consid-ered significant. The statistical analysis was performed
using the Software Program Stata System (SPSS) v13.0(Chicago, IL, USA) program.
No significant differences were observed between thegroups in the success of H. pylori eradication. Treat-ment was successful in 17 of 20 [85% (95%CI:
68–100)] patients in probiotic supplemented when
compared with 16 of 20 patients in placebo group
12.3 years (range: 3.3–18 years)] were recruited while
two were excluded (Figure 1). The baseline demogra-phic
patients are reported in Table 1. As shown, patients inthe two groups did not differ for age, sex, clinical and
Overall, in all probiotic supplemented children when
duration of symptoms and baseline GSRS score, as
compared with those receiving placebo there was a
well as for the endoscopic features detected (Table 2).
significant reduction of GSRS score during eradication
At histology, H. pylori was observed in the gastric ant-
therapy [4.1 Æ 2 (95%CI: 2.9–5.9) vs. 6.2 Æ 3 (95%CI:
rum of all patients. The presence of the bacterium was
5.2–8.3 P < 0.01] which became markedly evident at
always associated with chronic gastritis (lymphocytes
the end of follow-up [3.2 Æ 2 (95%CI: 2.4–4) vs.
and plasma cells in the lamina propria) with a variable
5.8 Æ 3.4 (95%CI: 4.8–6.9); P < 0.009] (Figure 2). In
degree of activity; none had gastric atrophy or intesti-
detail, when the frequencies of the symptoms were
nal metaplasia (Table 2). In all children, all the three
evaluated by taking into account only the occurrence
of new or aggravated symptoms during and after theeradication week relative to the baseline, we foundthat children receiving L. reuteri refer less frequently
epigastric pain during eradicating treatment (15% vs.
Forty patients completed the study. No children under-
45%; difference: )30%; P < 0.04) and abdominal dis-
went protocol deviation. Compliance to the therapy
tension (0% vs. 25%; difference: )25%; P < 0.02),
One consumption of antibiotics in the previous 4 weeks;
Figure 1. Flow diagram ofparticipants through each
ª 2006 The Authors, Aliment Pharmacol Ther 24, 1461–1468Journal compilation ª 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
L . R E U T E R I A N D A N T I B I O T I C - A S S O C I A T E D S Y M P T O M S D U R I N G H . P Y L O R I E R A D I C A T I O N
Table 1. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics
GSRS
Figure 2. Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS)in children receiving the Lactobacillus reuteri or placebobefore, during and after Helicobacter pylori eradication
Table 2. Endoscopic and histological findings in the two
therapy. Comparison of continuous variables was per-
severity of the symptoms. Symptoms which were most
positively influenced by L. reuteri were abdominal dis-
tension, disorders of defecation, epigastric pain, eruc-
The onset of side-effects during anti-H. pylori ther-
apy is mainly due to the use of antibiotics in moderate
to high-dose or in combination.6 Antibiotic-related
side-effects are common and usually affect the gastro-
intestinal system. The intestinal microbiota is charac-
terized by a high bacterial concentration, up to
1014 CFU/mL in the colon; these bacteria and colonic
mucosal cells coexist in a delicate equilibrium that can
be easily altered by antibacterial drugs causing the
emergence of potentially pathogen species over thesaprophytic flora. Unfortunately, the most frequentlyused antibiotics for H. pylori eradication (amoxycillin,
eructation (5% vs. 35%; difference: )30%; P < 0.04),
clarithromycin, metronidazole) are frequently accom-
disorders of defecation (15% vs. 45%; difference:
panied by gastrointestinal side-effects and clarithro-
)30%; P < 0.04) and halitosis (5% vs. 35%; difference:
)30%; P < 0.04) thereafter (Table 3). No adverse
contractility of gastrointestinal smooth muscle, leading
Probiotics are ‘living micro-organisms which upon
ingestion in certain numbers favourably influence the
health of the host by improving the indigenous
In this randomized, placebo-controlled study, children
microbiota’.21 Many studies have documented the
on H. pylori eradication therapy receiving L. reuteri
effectiveness of prophylactic probiotics taken with
when compared with peers receiving placebo, reported
antibiotics in preventing or lowering the antibiotic-
a significant reduction of the total symptom score,
related gastrointestinal side-effect burden.22–24 It is up
which takes into account both the frequency and the
to the experts in microbiology, nutritional sciences
ª 2006 The Authors, Aliment Pharmacol Ther 24, 1461–1468Journal compilation ª 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Table 3. Frequencies of side-effects reported by the two groups, before, during and after eradication therapy
* Assessed before (history of urticaria acute or chronic), during (acute urticaria) and after therapy (in the following 20 days).
have shown that after its administration to healthy vol-
requirements for probiotic bacterial strains: bile and
unteers, it was possible to detect this strain adhering to
acid resistance, adhesion to the mucosa and/or to
epithelial cells from corpus and antral gastric biopsies
enterocytes, at least temporary colonization of the
providing the first clear and direct evidence of colon-
human gut, ability to inhibit known gut pathogens
ization of the human stomach by L. reuteri.14
and antimicrobial substances, stability and activity
Our experience in children on eradication therapy
during manufacture and storage, safety in human use
showed that L. reuteri is effective in reducing the total
and proven health-promoting effects.25 L. reuteri
symptom score and the onset of bloating, disorders of
shares most of these general characteristics.12, 26–29
defecation and halitosis similarly to adult data after
Our choice to use L. reuteri ATCC 55730 derives from
the administration of a single strain of Lactobacillus
different observations. L. reuteri has been extensively
GG (LGG)4 or Bacillus clausii6 or Saccharomyces bou-
studied and is widely used as a food additive to
lardii or a mixture of Lactobacillus acidophilus, and
improve human gastrointestinal health.26 Oral adminis-
Bifidobacterium lactis.7 However, what we have found
tration delivers L. reuteri ATCC 55730 to the gastroin-
more difficult to explain is the effect of L. reuteri on
testinal tract, leading to the shedding of live bacteria in
symptoms such as eructation and epigastric pain
which are more likely related to H. pylori infection.
L. reuteri ATCC 55730 administration is safe both in
This is not a novel finding since other authors have
adults28, 29 and in children,30 significantly reduces the
described a significant reduction of epigastric pain in
incidence and the severity of diarrhoea of different ori-
the probiotic treated arm during H. pylori eradica-
gins and reduces gastrointestinal illness and infec-
tion7, 33 although no explanation was advocated. It is
tions.27, 31 Being acid resistant, they persist in the
of interest a recent evidence that some L. reuteri
stomach longer than other bacteria surviving in high
strains were able to compete with H. pylori for the
proportions (>80%) in the gastric environment for peri-
binding to its receptor on gastric epithelial cells
ods of 2 h.32 L. reuteri ATCC 55730 adhere to gastric
(asialo-GM1 and sulfatide) suggesting that a binding
epithelial cells in vitro32 and recently Vauler N, et al.
ª 2006 The Authors, Aliment Pharmacol Ther 24, 1461–1468Journal compilation ª 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
L . R E U T E R I A N D A N T I B I O T I C - A S S O C I A T E D S Y M P T O M S D U R I N G H . P Y L O R I E R A D I C A T I O N
surface.34 Therefore, it is possible that the concomitant
symptoms. Our data demonstrate that symptoms relief,
use of a probiotic along with eradication therapy may
although in the short term, is better achieved by the
decrease more rapidly the bacterial load thus amelior-
concomitant administration of L. reuteri together with
ating symptoms such as epigastric pain. Indeed, we
antibiotics; in our experience, the use of L. reuteri
have demonstrated that L. reuteri ATCC 55730 is cap-
does not improve the eradication rate, however, the
able of decreasing the bacterial load when adminis-
small sample size of our series does not allow to draw
tered to untreated patients (R.F., personal unpublished
firm conclusion, although in line with previous studies
data) as shown for other probiotic strains.35 Moreover,
in adults.6, 7, 33 Finally, similar to previous experien-
it is documented that probiotics have an anti-inflam-
ces,6, 7, 33 the overall compliance of patients was not
matory effect that might contribute to reduce gastric
increased by L. reuteri, however, the treatment tolerab-
inflammation when given to H. pylori colonized ani-
mals.36, 37 Despite the suitability of this hypothesis,
In Italy a box of L. reuteri costs 11.00 euros for 10
caution should be used in attributing symptomatic
pills that makes 1.1 euro for each treatment day,
benefits to probiotic oral therapy until the mechanistic
therefore, its use would increase the overall costs of
bases of action of probiotics are fully understood.
approximately 20 euros. Moreover, we have to consi-
A possible confounding factor in our study may be
der that often, after an antibiotic treatment, sympto-
that all enrolled children were symptomatic, reason for
matic children receive a probiotic that it is usually
which these children were tested and treated since in
what the family have at home and rarely one with
childhood there is no indication for either in the
proved efficacy for a particular indication.
absence of symptoms.1 However, taking into account
In conclusion, our study shows, for the first time in
only the occurrence of new or aggravated symptoms
the paediatric population, that probiotic supplementa-
during and after the eradication therapy when com-
tion, during and after a sequential treatment for
pared with baseline we have demonstrated the superi-
H. pylori eradication, may positively affect therapy-
ority of L. reuteri when compared with placebo at
related symptoms and overall treatment tolerance.
Dealing with children, we always have a double aim
when we decide to eradicate the H. pylori, being theelimination of the bacterium and the resolution of
No external funding was received for this study.
8 Gotteland M, Brunser O, Cruchet S. Sys-
Sjostedt S, Edlund C. Comparative effects
1 Gold BD, Colletti RB, Abbott M, et al.
controlling gastric colonization by Heli-
gastric and intestinal microflora in Heli-
cobacter pylori-infected patients. J Anti-
microb Chemother 1999; 44: 629–40.
Helicobacter pylori infection. Int J Anti-
6 Nista EC, Candelli M, Cremonini F, et al.
2 Oderda G, Marinello D, Lerro P, et al.
10 Malfertheiner P, Megraud F, O’Morain
blind randomized multicentre trial. Heli-
3 Deltenre M, Ntounda R, Jonas C, et al.
et al. Effect of different probiotic prepa-
11 Mitsuoka T. The human gastrointestinal
does it fail? Ital J Gastroenterol Hepatol
rations on anti-Helicobacter pylori ther-
4 Megraud F. H. pylori antibiotic resist-
12 Reuter G. The Lactobacillus and Bifido-
intestine: composition and succession.
ª 2006 The Authors, Aliment Pharmacol Ther 24, 1461–1468Journal compilation ª 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
21 Lewis SJ, Freedman AR. Review article:
14 Valeur N, Engel P, Carbajal N, et al.
23 Cremonini F, Di Caro S, Nista EC et al.
32 Conway PL, Gorbach SL, Goldin BR.
et al. Carbon 13-labeled urea breath test
nal cells. J Dairy Sci 1987; 70: 1–12.
24 Arvola T, Laiho K, Torkkeli S, et al. Pro-
16 Rutigliano V, Ierardi E, Francavilla R,
ized study. Pediatrics 1999; 104: e64.
dyspepsia in childhood: clinical pattern,
25 de Vrese M, Schrezenmeir J. Probiotics
and non-intestinal infectious conditions.
Br J Nutr 2002; 88 (Suppl. 1): 59–66.
34 Mukai T, Asasaka T, Sato E, et al. Inhi-
17 Svedlund J, Sjodin I, Dotevall G. GSRS:
a clinical rating scale for gastrointesti-
ease. Dig Dis Sci 1988; 33: 129–34.
25–29 Global access available at http://
inal pain in children. Pediatr Clin North
36 Michetti P, Dorta G, Wiesel PH, et al.
et al. Bacteriotherapy with Lactobacillus
19 Francavilla R, Lionetti E, Castellaneta
reuteri in rotavirus gastroenteritis. Pedi-
atr Infect Dis J 1997; 16: 1103–7.
28 Wolf BW, Garleb K, Ataya D, et al.
reuteri in healthy adults male subjects.
Microb Ecol Health Dis 1995; 8: 41–50.
et al. Antagonistic activity against Heli-
20 Peters DH, Clissold SP. Clarithromycin.
29 Wolf BW, Wheeler KB, Ataya DG, et al.
ciency virus. Food Chem Toxicol 1998;36: 1085–94.
ª 2006 The Authors, Aliment Pharmacol Ther 24, 1461–1468Journal compilation ª 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
eDocAmerica Healthtip - FDA warning regarding OTC weight loss drugs Health Tip: FDA warning regarding OTC weight loss drugs To many in the medical profession, "over-the-counter" (OTC) weight loss products have long been under a veil of suspicion regarding their safety and effectiveness. Ephedra, a stimulant that was a component of a number of OTC products, was banne
DENTAL REGISTRATION AND HISTORY PLEASE PRINT • ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS PATIENT INFORMATION DENTAL INFORMATION Date ______________________________________________________________________________________________________SS/HIC/Patient ID # _____________________________________Relationship to Patient ___________________________________Patient Name ________________________________________