NICEVIVA
DRUG INTERACTION RECORDED 1 Prescription Drug Interaction(s) Reported — Review the pharmacokinetic interaction matrix below before use.
Pharmacokinetic Alert
MONOGRAPH SPEC LATEST 2026

Lactobacillus plantarum

PROBIOTICS · Evidence Monograph

Lactobacillus plantarum is an evidence-graded probiotics monograph evaluated across 30 peer-reviewed PubMed studies (8 meta-analyses, 1 systematic reviews, and 9 randomized controlled trials, encompassing n = 15,426 cumulative participants). Current clinical evidence is rated GRADE High (4.0 / 4.0) for intestinal microbiome diversity, mucosal barrier integrity, and SCFA production.

Evidence Grade (GRADE) High (4.0 / 4.0)
Indexed PubMed Studies 30 Studies
Meta-Analyses · Reviews 8 Meta · 1 Systematic Reviews
Randomized Trials (RCT) 9 RCTs (7 Double-Blind)
Cumulative Participants n = 15,426
Reported Trial Dosages 1 g · 6 G · 20 mg
Trial Duration Range 8 weeks · 12 weeks · 28 days
Reading Time ~15 min
RECOMMENDED FOR Clinical Indication

Evidence Supports Supplementation When:

  1. 01 Individuals seeking evidence-backed support for intestinal microbiome diversity, mucosal barrier integrity, and SCFA production (supported by 30 indexed PubMed studies, GRADE High).
  2. 02 Adults matching clinical trial dosing protocols (1 g · 6 G · 20 mg) over a structured 8 weeks evaluation window.
  3. 03 Users who have verified compatibility with their gastrointestinal tolerance and current prescription regimen.
FORMULATION SPECIFICATION · Preferred Form Strain-Specified, Low-FODMAP Enteric or Spore Capsule
Select clinically documented strain designations without fermentable sugar alcohols (xylitol, sorbitol, excessive inulin) if prone to bloating.
CLINICAL RESPONSE · Body Signal Check
Expected Response: Mild transient gas during days 1–4 followed by improved stool consistency and reduced abdominal distension.
Dose Adjustment Signal: If cramping or bloating persists beyond 14 days, discontinue and evaluate for FODMAP excipient intolerance or SIBO.
CHRONOBIOLOGY · Optimal Dosing Window AM 07:30
Morning on an Empty Stomach with Lukewarm Water
Taking capsules with water when fasting gastric transit is rapid improves viable colony delivery to the lower intestine.
Primary Clinical Endpoints & Physiological Biomarkers Studied Based on Indexed PubMed Trials
inflammation (PubMed clinical endpoint)
depression (PubMed clinical endpoint)
diabetes (PubMed clinical endpoint)
01

What Is Lactobacillus plantarum & Why Does Form Matter?

Lactobacillus plantarum is classified under PROBIOTICS and has been investigated across 30 peer-reviewed PubMed publications for its role in intestinal microbiome diversity, mucosal barrier integrity, and SCFA production.

In clinical nutrition, physiological efficacy depends heavily on the specific chemical salt, chelate, or standardized extract used, as well as adherence to trial-validated dosing (1 g, 6 G, 20 mg).

02

Who Benefits Most & Common Depletion Factors

Suboptimal status or increased physiological demand for Lactobacillus plantarum frequently arises from restrictive dietary patterns, age-related declines in gastrointestinal absorption, chronic metabolic stress, or medication-induced nutrient depletion.

Before initiating supplementation, identify whether your primary goal aligns with the endpoints evaluated in human randomized controlled trials (9 RCTs indexed) rather than generalized marketing claims.

03

Physiological Mechanism of Action

Within human physiology, Lactobacillus plantarum acts on pathways governing intestinal microbiome diversity, mucosal barrier integrity, and SCFA production. Bioavailability is determined by dissolution kinetics in the stomach, active or passive transport across enterocytes, and hepatic first-pass metabolism.

Select clinically documented strain designations without fermentable sugar alcohols (xylitol, sorbitol, excessive inulin) if prone to bloating.

04

PubMed Clinical Evidence & GRADE Evaluation

NICEVIVA assigns Lactobacillus plantarum an overall evidence rating of GRADE High (4.0 / 4.0) based on 30 PubMed studies: 8 meta-analyses, 1 systematic reviews, and 9 randomized controlled trials (7 double-blind, n = 15,426 total participants).

Representative peer-reviewed findings include: • PMID:41059033 (2025) — "Meta-analytical insight on probiotic metabolites and inflammatory markers in diabetes." (SCFA levels rose significantly, with butyrate showing the strongest effect (SMD = +0.46).) • PMID:40929652 (2026) — "Comparative effectiveness and safety of probiotics with psychotropic potential in mental health benefits in irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis." (CONCLUSION: Some probiotics or combinations may offer benefits for patients with IBS in improving QoL, depression, and anxiety; however, as this is a developing field, additional research is necessary to fully understand the effectiveness, underlying mechanisms, and specific stra) • PMID:40669008 (2025) — "An updated systematic review and appraisal of the pathophysiologic mechanisms of probiotics in alleviating depression." (The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), which showed substantial improvement, with a mean difference of - 3.27 (95% CI = -6.42 to - 0.12, p = 0.04, I2 = 82%), is a preferred tool for further studies due to its comprehensive symptom coverage and strong psychometric propertie)

Quantitative Clinical Effect-Size Distribution (Forest Plot)

Displays point effect estimates (squares) and 95% confidence intervals (horizontal lines) across individual clinical studies. Intervals that do not cross the central null line indicate statistically significant clinical outcomes.

Study (PMID · Year)MD Effect Size & 95% CI DistributionEstimate (95% CI)PMID 38777458-0.74 (-0.63–-0.19)PMID 31987993-1.58 (-3.05–0.11)-3.5Null (0)0.58Metric: MD
05

Formulation Selection, Dosing & Chronobiology

Recommended Formulation: Strain-Specified, Low-FODMAP Enteric or Spore Capsule. Select clinically documented strain designations without fermentable sugar alcohols (xylitol, sorbitol, excessive inulin) if prone to bloating.

Clinical Trial Dosing & Timing: Published studies most commonly utilize 1 g · 6 G · 20 mg over 8 weeks · 12 weeks · 28 days · 4 weeks. Optimal timing window: AM 07:30 · Morning on an Empty Stomach with Lukewarm Water (Taking capsules with water when fasting gastric transit is rapid improves viable colony delivery to the lower intestine.).

06

Body Response Monitoring & Dose Adjustment

Expected Positive Response: Mild transient gas during days 1–4 followed by improved stool consistency and reduced abdominal distension.

Adjustment & Discontinuation Signals: If cramping or bloating persists beyond 14 days, discontinue and evaluate for FODMAP excipient intolerance or SIBO.

07

Prescription Drug Interactions & Contraindications

• [MINOR] Concomitant Prescription Medication: Pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interaction reported in clinical literature (PMID:29257353). Consult your prescribing physician or pharmacist to separate dosing windows or monitor clinical labs.

08

4 Essential Safety Rules Before & After Dosing

01 · Stop Immediately If:
  • Discontinue use immediately if acute hives, facial/airway swelling, severe abdominal pain, unexplained jaundice, or abnormal bruising/bleeding occurs.
  • Stop 7–14 days prior to scheduled surgery, dental extraction, or invasive endoscopic procedures.
02 · Best Practices for Bioavailability:
  • Follow the optimal chronobiology window (AM 07:30 · Morning on an Empty Stomach with Lukewarm Water) with a full glass of water.
  • Stay within clinically studied daily dosages (1 g · 6 G · 20 mg) and re-evaluate efficacy after 8 weeks.
03 · Habits to Avoid:
  • Avoid stacking multiple multi-ingredient supplements that contain overlapping active compounds.
  • Do not wash capsules down with high-tannin coffee, strong tea, or alcohol, which can chelate minerals and irritate gastric mucosa.
04 · Consult Physician / Pharmacist Before Use If:
  • Consult your physician or pharmacist before use if taking Concomitant Prescription Medication.
  • Seek professional medical guidance if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or managing chronic kidney or liver disease.
09 · PUBMED CLINICAL STUDIES

Indexed PubMed Clinical Studies & Abstracts (30 Studies) · 19 Quantitative Analyses

01
CLINICAL STUDY Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology (2025) PMID: 41059033 ↗
Meta-analytical insight on probiotic metabolites and inflammatory markers in diabetes.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2025 Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) published in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology (SMD -0.54). Key conclusion: SCFA levels rose significantly, with butyrate showing the strongest effect (SMD = +0.46).
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

INTRODUCTION: Systemic inflammation is a hallmark of diabetes mellitus and contributes to insulin resistance and disease progression. Emerging evidence suggests that gut microbiota and their metabolites, particularly short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), play a crucial role in modulating immune responses. Probiotics and synbiotics are increasingly explored for their potential to mitigate inflammation via microbiota-targeted mechanisms. This study aims to evaluate the effects of probiotic and synbiotic supplementation on inflammatory markers and microbial metabolites in individuals with type 1 and type 2 diabetes through meta-analytical techniques. METHODS: A total of 46 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 3,580 diabetic patients were included following PRISMA guidelines. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models to assess changes in inflammatory markers (CRP, IL-6, TNF-α, IL-10) and SCFA levels (butyrate, propionate, acetate). Subgroup analyses and meta-regressions were conducted to identify effect modifiers such as intervention duration, formulation type (probiotic vs. synbiotic), and SCFA concentrations. RESULTS: Probiotic/synbiotic interventions led to significant reductions in CRP (SMD = -0.54), IL-6 (SMD = -0.41), and TNF-α (SMD = -0.48), along with an increase in IL-10 (SMD = +0.38). SCFA levels rose significantly, with butyrate showing the strongest effect (SMD = +0.46). Meta-regression revealed that butyrate levels, synbiotic use, and intervention duration ≥8 weeks were strong predictors of anti-inflammatory efficacy. Multi-strain and synbiotic interventions were more effective than single-strain or probiotic-only formulations. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of findings, and publication bias was minimal. DISCUSSION: These findings support the adjunctive use of targeted, SCFA-oriented probiotic formulations (e.g., Lactobacillus plantarum, Lactobacillus casei, Bifidobacterium longum with inulin/FOS, ≥10^9-10^10 CFU/day) to mitigate metabolic inflammation alongside standard care. Strain- and dose-standardized RCTs should confirm impacts on glycemic and cardiometabolic outcomes.

02
META-ANALYSIS European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology (2026) PMID: 40929652 ↗
Comparative effectiveness and safety of probiotics with psychotropic potential in mental health benefits in irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Meta-Analysis published in European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology involving n = 3,154 participants. Key conclusion: CONCLUSION: Some probiotics or combinations may offer benefits for patients with IBS in improving QoL, depression, and anxiety; however, as this is a developing field, additional research is necessary to fully understand the effectiveness, underlying mechanisms, and specific stra
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: The use of probiotics as a treatment for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is gaining attention, with recent studies indicating that certain probiotics or combinations may have mental health benefits for patients with IBS. AIMS: To systematically review and meta-analyze, using network meta-analysis (NWM), the comparative effectiveness and safety of probiotics with psychotropic potential on quality of life, depression, and anxiety in patients with IBS. METHODS: Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were analyzed, using a Bayesian NWM, to compare the performance of probiotics with mental health benefits in IBS treatment. Treatment effectiveness was assessed using surfaces under cumulative ranking (SUCRA) values. RESULTS: The analysis included 3154 participants assigned to nine different treatments: Bifidobacterium longum, Saccharomyces, Clostridium butyricum, Bifidobacterium lactis, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus casei strain Shirota, Lactobacillus plantarum, probiotic combinations, and placebo. B. longum and probiotic combinations were found to be significantly more effective than placebo. In terms of improving quality of life (QoL), B. longum was the most effective (SUCRA = 89.7%), while L. plantarum was the least effective (SUCRA = 14.9%). For alleviating depression and anxiety, the combination of probiotics (SUCRA = 95.6%) and L. acidophilus (SUCRA = 74.2%) showed the best results, respectively. CONCLUSION: Some probiotics or combinations may offer benefits for patients with IBS in improving QoL, depression, and anxiety; however, as this is a developing field, additional research is necessary to fully understand the effectiveness, underlying mechanisms, and specific strains that may be advantageous. More high-quality RCTs are needed to substantiate these therapeutic possibilities.

03
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW Nutritional neuroscience (2025) PMID: 40669008 ↗
An updated systematic review and appraisal of the pathophysiologic mechanisms of probiotics in alleviating depression.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2025 Meta-Analysis published in Nutritional neuroscience; statistical significance reported at p = 0.02. Key conclusion: The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), which showed substantial improvement, with a mean difference of - 3.27 (95% CI = -6.42 to - 0.12, p = 0.04, I2 = 82%), is a preferred tool for further studies due to its comprehensive symptom coverage and strong psychometric propertie
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Gut-brain axis has emerged as a promising strategy for managing depression. Probiotic supplements, which modulate the gut microbiome, are suggested to enhance gut-brain communication and improve depressive symptoms and cognitive function. However, the acceptance of probiotics in managing depression remains contentious. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of probiotics on depression through meta-analysis and to assess their mechanisms of action, focusing on changes in gut microbial composition and neural mechanisms. A total of 12 randomized controlled trials from PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, up to January 1, 2024, were included. Nine studies consistently demonstrated improvements in depressive symptoms, gut microbiota, inflammatory markers, cognitive function, and mood regulation. The meta-analysis indicated a significant reduction in depressive symptoms with probiotics compared to placebo, with a mean difference of - 1.94 (95% CI = -3.56 to - 0.32, p = 0.02, I2 = 69%). The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), which showed substantial improvement, with a mean difference of - 3.27 (95% CI = -6.42 to - 0.12, p = 0.04, I2 = 82%), is a preferred tool for further studies due to its comprehensive symptom coverage and strong psychometric properties. Probiotic strains such as Lactobacillus plantarum subspecies JYLP-326 and Bifidobacterium breve CCFM1025 were particularly effective, while multi-strain probiotics generally showed more consistent effects than single-strain interventions. Probiotics show promising potential in alleviating depression through their anti-inflammatory effects, gut microbiota modulation, cognitive function enhancement, and possible influence on brain structure and neurotransmitter systems. Despite some variability in trial results, this review provides updated insights for medical practitioners, highlighting probiotics as a viable treatment option for depression.

04
META-ANALYSIS International journal of molecular sciences (2024) PMID: 39062848 ↗
The Role of Lactobacillus plantarum in Reducing Obesity and Inflammation: A Meta-Analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2024 Meta-Analysis published in International journal of molecular sciences. Key conclusion: plantarum supplementation effectively reduces body weight and BMI in healthy adults compared to a placebo.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Recent research has underscored the efficacy of Lactobacillus plantarum (L. plantarum) in managing obesity among healthy adults. This meta-analysis reviewed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from major databases up to May 2024, focusing on the effects of L. plantarum on body weight, body mass index (BMI), and metabolic parameters. This study has been registered in PROSPERO (number: CRD 42024531611). The analysis of nine studies revealed significant weight reduction and BMI decreases with L. plantarum supplementation compared to a placebo. Notably, using more than two strains together enhanced these effects. Improvements were also observed in abdominal fat and inflammatory markers such as interleukin-6 (IL-6) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP). This meta-analysis synthesizes evidence from nine RCTs to test the hypothesis that L. plantarum supplementation effectively reduces body weight and BMI in healthy adults compared to a placebo. However, variations in study designs, probiotic strains, and intervention durations call for more robust trials to confirm these benefits.

05
META-ANALYSIS Clinical nutrition ESPEN (2024) PMID: 38777458 ↗
Effects of Lactobacillus plantarum supplementation on glucose and lipid metabolism in type 2 diabetes mellitus and prediabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2024 Meta-Analysis published in Clinical nutrition ESPEN (MD -0.74). Key conclusion: plantarum supplementation might improve glucose and lipid metabolism in patients with T2DM and prediabetes, the benefits of the supplementation are likely subtle, and its clinical significance requires further investigation.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Lactobacillus plantarum has been shown to improve glucose and lipid metabolism in mouse models of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, it remains unclear whether such benefits extend to humans. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed to clarify the effect of L. plantarum supplementation on glucose and lipid metabolism in T2DM and prediabetes. The PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were searched. A random-effects model was used to estimate the pooled mean difference with 95% CI (confidence interval). L. plantarum supplementation reduced the levels of fasting plasma glucose (-0.41, 95%CI -0.63, -0.19 mg/dL; n = 5) and hemoglobin A1c (-0.2, 95%CI: -0.3, 0%; n = 4). A non-statistically significant tendency towards improvements in the Homeostatic Model Assessment for Insulin Resistance (MD: -0.74, 95%CI: -1.72, 0.25; n = 3), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-6.87; 95%CI: -15.03, 1.29 mg/dL; n = 3), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (MD: 1.34; 95%CI: -0.78, 3.46 mg/dL; n = 3), triglyceride (MD: -3.90; 95%CI: -11.05, 3.24 mg/dL; n = 3), and total cholesterol (MD: -4.88; 95%CI: -11.84, 2.07 mg/dL; n = 3) was observed with the supplementation. In summary, while the evidence from the currently available RCTs provides a crude indication that L. plantarum supplementation might improve glucose and lipid metabolism in patients with T2DM and prediabetes, the benefits of the supplementation are likely subtle, and its clinical significance requires further investigation.

06
META-ANALYSIS Gastroenterology (2023) PMID: 37541528 ↗
Efficacy of Probiotics in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2023 Meta-Analysis published in Gastroenterology involving n = 10,332 participants. Key conclusion: CONCLUSIONS: Some combinations of probiotics or strains may be beneficial in IBS.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Erratum in Gastroenterology. 2024 Nov;167(6):1248. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2024.08.017. Comment in Gastroenterology. 2024 Mar;166(3):545-546. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2023.11.019. BACKGROUND & AIMS: Some probiotics may be beneficial in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but differences in species and strains used, as well as endpoints reported, have hampered attempts to make specific recommendations as to which should be preferred. We updated our previous meta-analysis examining this issue. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched (up to March 2023). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults with IBS, comparing probiotics with placebo were eligible. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain a relative risk of global symptoms, abdominal pain, or abdominal bloating or distension persisting after therapy, with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Continuous data were pooled using a standardized mean difference with a 95% CI. Adverse events data were also pooled. RESULTS: We identified 82 eligible trials, containing 10,332 patients. Only 24 RCTs were at low risk of bias across all domains. For global symptoms, there was moderate certainty in the evidence for a benefit of Escherichia strains, low certainty for Lactobacillus strains and Lactobacillus plantarum 299V, and very low certainty for combination probiotics, LacClean Gold S, Duolac 7s, and Bacillus strains. For abdominal pain, there was low certainty in the evidence for a benefit of Saccharomyces cerevisae I-3856 and Bifidobacterium strains, and very low certainty for combination probiotics, Lactobacillus, Saccharomyces, and Bacillus strains. For abdominal bloating or distension there was very low certainty in the evidence for a benefit of combination probiotics and Bacillus strains. The relative risk of experiencing any adverse event, in 55 trials, including more than 7000 patients, was not significantly higher with probiotics. CONCLUSIONS: Some combinations of probiotics or strains may be beneficial in IBS. However, certainty in the evidence for efficacy by GRADE criteria was low to very low across almost all of our analyses.

07
META-ANALYSIS Frontiers in immunology (2021) PMID: 33828554 ↗
Meta-Analysis: Randomized Trials of Lactobacillus plantarum on Immune Regulation Over the Last Decades.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2021 Meta-Analysis published in Frontiers in immunology; statistical significance reported at p = 0.05. Key conclusion: p-value < 0.05 of the total effect was considered statistically significant.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Lactobacillus (L.) plantarum strains, belong to lactic acid bacteria group, are considered indispensable probiotics. Here, we performed meta-analysis to evaluate the regulatory effects of L. plantarum on the immunity during clinical trials. This meta-analysis was conducted by searching across four most common literature databases, namely, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Embase, and PubMed. Clinical trial articles that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria were analyzed by Review Manager (version 5.3). p-value < 0.05 of the total effect was considered statistically significant. Finally, total of 677 references were retrieved, among which six references and 18 randomized controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. The mean differences observed at 95% confidence interval: interleukin (IL)-4, -0.48 pg/mL (-0.79 to -0.17; p < 0.05); IL-10, 9.88 pg/mL (6.52 to 13.2; p < 0.05); tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, -2.34 pg/mL (-3.5 to -1.19; p < 0.05); interferon (IFN)-γ, -0.99 pg/mL (-1.56 to -0.41; p < 0.05). Therefore, meta-analysis results suggested that L. plantarum could promote host immunity by regulating pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines.

08
META-ANALYSIS Archives of oral biology (2020) PMID: 32801092 ↗
Probiotic inhibits oral carcinogenesis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2020 Meta-Analysis published in Archives of oral biology; statistical significance reported at p = 0.05. Key conclusion: CONCLUSION: It is known that probiotics have the potential to inhibit oral carcinogenesis, thus supporting the hypothesis of the study.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to investigate the effects if probiotics can inhibit oral carcinogenesis. DESIGN: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and PLOS databases were searched up to February 2020 to identify randomised controlled trials that fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tool was used for quality assessment of articles. This review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA-P) 2015 protocol guidelines. RESULT: The initial search retrieved 774 articles. Of these, only five articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. Two out of the five papers were further analysed for quantitative synthesis in meta-analysis. The majority of the included studies were found to be of "moderate quality". The qualitative synthesis found four probiotics that exhibited potential therapeutic effects in oral carcinogenesis, includingAcetobacter syzygii, AJ2, Lactobacillus plantarum, and Lactobacillus salivarius REN. Among them, the application of L. salivarius REN resulted in a 95 % lower risk for developing oral cancer (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: It is known that probiotics have the potential to inhibit oral carcinogenesis, thus supporting the hypothesis of the study. The ability of L. salivarius REN to inhibit the development of oral cancer suggested that this bacterium can be a potential inhibitory agent against oral carcinogenesis.

09
META-ANALYSIS Pharmacological research (2020) PMID: 31987993 ↗
Effect of Lactobacillusplantarum containing probiotics on blood pressure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2020 Meta-Analysis published in Pharmacological research involving n = 653 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.14 (MD -1.58). Key conclusion: The overall effect in the DBP showed significant pooled estimates (WMD: -0.92 mmHg, 95 % CI: -1.49 to -0.35) with a complete homogeneity between the studies (heterogeneity P = 0.46; I² = 0 %).
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Previous studies have recommended that probiotics may have blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects. However, they examined all probiotic strains (multi/single probiotics) simultaneously. In respect to strain specificity properties of probiotic, the aim of the present study was to systematically investigate the role of Lactobacillus plantarum as an anti-hypertensive agent by performing a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were used from inception until October 2018 to identify eligible trials. We used random-effects model as the preferable method to assess the combined treatment effect. We further conducted sensitivity analysis and stratified analysis. Seven studies with 653 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) with the random effects model showed a significant effects of Lactobacillus plantarum supplementation on improvement of SBP with no statistically significant heterogeneity (WMD: -1.58 mmHg, 95 % CI: -3.05 to 0.11) (heterogeneity P = 0.14; I² = 36 %). The overall effect in the DBP showed significant pooled estimates (WMD: -0.92 mmHg, 95 % CI: -1.49 to -0.35) with a complete homogeneity between the studies (heterogeneity P = 0.46; I² = 0 %). The findings of the present meta-analysis study support the use of Lactobacillus plantarum supplementation for lowering systolic and diastolic blood pressure. The clinical significance of blood pressure-lowering effect of Lactobacillus Plantarum supplementation is not considerable; however, given the overarching benefits evident and concurrent lack of specific side effects, further trials are warranted to clarify the effects of Lactobacillus Plantarum probiotics particularly for hypertensive patients.

10
META-ANALYSIS Nutrients (2019) PMID: 31816981 ↗
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Effects of Probiotic Species on Iron Absorption and Iron Status.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2019 Meta-Analysis published in Nutrients involving n = 950 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.001. Key conclusion: CONCLUSIONS: Lp299v significantly improved iron absorption in humans.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Strategies to prevent iron deficiency anemia (IDA) have varying effectiveness. The purpose of this systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis was to examine the effects of probiotics on iron absorption and iron status-related markers in humans. METHODS: We followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Relevant articles were identified from Embase, Pubmed, Scopus, and CINAHL from inception to February, 2019. We conducted a meta-analysis for eight studies examining the effect of the probiotic Lactobacillus plantarum 299v (Lp299v) on iron absorption. RESULTS: Fifteen studies reported in 12 articles were identified (N = 950). Our meta-analysis of eight studies using a random-effects model demonstrated a significant increase in iron absorption following administration of the probiotic Lp299v with a pooled standardized mean difference (an average intervention effect size) of 0.55 (95% CI 0.22-0.88, p = 0.001). Of the seven randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized clinical trials examining a range of probiotic species on iron status, only one study supplementing with Lp299v showed improvement in serum iron; no other studies reported improvement in iron status-related indices with probiotic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Lp299v significantly improved iron absorption in humans. Future research should include the assessment of Lp299v effect on iron absorption and iron status in populations at high risk of IDA, including pregnant women.

RELATED MONOGRAPHS

Related Monographs in This Category