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

Saccharomyces boulardii (Traveler)

DIGESTIVE · Evidence Monograph

Saccharomyces boulardii (Traveler) is an evidence-graded digestive monograph evaluated across 23 peer-reviewed PubMed studies (8 meta-analyses, 1 systematic reviews, and 5 randomized controlled trials, encompassing n = 19,931 cumulative participants). Current clinical evidence is rated GRADE High (4.0 / 4.0) for targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support.

Evidence Grade (GRADE) High (4.0 / 4.0)
Indexed PubMed Studies 23 Studies
Meta-Analyses · Reviews 8 Meta · 1 Systematic Reviews
Randomized Trials (RCT) 5 RCTs (5 Double-Blind)
Cumulative Participants n = 19,931
Reported Trial Dosages 20 mg · 750 mg · 250 mg
Trial Duration Range 14 days · 30 days · 3 months
Reading Time ~12 min
RECOMMENDED FOR Clinical Indication

Evidence Supports Supplementation When:

  1. 01 Individuals seeking evidence-backed support for targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support (supported by 23 indexed PubMed studies, GRADE High).
  2. 02 Adults matching clinical trial dosing protocols (20 mg · 750 mg · 250 mg) over a structured 14 days evaluation window.
  3. 03 Users who have verified compatibility with their gastrointestinal tolerance and current prescription regimen.
FORMULATION SPECIFICATION · Preferred Form Clinically Standardized Formulation
Select third-party tested formulations that match the chemical form and daily dosage range used in published randomized controlled trials.
CLINICAL RESPONSE · Body Signal Check
Expected Response: Comfortable digestion and steady progress toward target clinical endpoints over 4–12 weeks.
Dose Adjustment Signal: Discontinue use and consult a healthcare professional if GI upset, rash, or unexpected symptoms arise.
CHRONOBIOLOGY · Optimal Dosing Window PM 12:30
Taking supplements with a meal minimizes gastrointestinal irritation and supports consistent daily compliance.
Primary Clinical Endpoints & Physiological Biomarkers Studied Based on Indexed PubMed Trials
Primary digestive clinical efficacy (23 PubMed studies)
Quantitative biomarker & outcome analysis (20 studies with effect-size/sample data)
Randomized controlled trial verification (5 RCTs · 5 double-blind)
Systematic review & meta-analysis synthesis (8 meta-analyses · 1 reviews)
01

What Is Saccharomyces boulardii (Traveler) & Why Does Form Matter?

Saccharomyces boulardii (Traveler) is classified under DIGESTIVE and has been investigated across 23 peer-reviewed PubMed publications for its role in targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support.

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 (20 mg, 750 mg, 250 mg).

02

Who Benefits Most & Common Depletion Factors

Suboptimal status or increased physiological demand for Saccharomyces boulardii (Traveler) 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 (5 RCTs indexed) rather than generalized marketing claims.

03

Physiological Mechanism of Action

Within human physiology, Saccharomyces boulardii (Traveler) acts on pathways governing targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support. Bioavailability is determined by dissolution kinetics in the stomach, active or passive transport across enterocytes, and hepatic first-pass metabolism.

Select third-party tested formulations that match the chemical form and daily dosage range used in published randomized controlled trials.

04

PubMed Clinical Evidence & GRADE Evaluation

NICEVIVA assigns Saccharomyces boulardii (Traveler) an overall evidence rating of GRADE High (4.0 / 4.0) based on 23 PubMed studies: 8 meta-analyses, 1 systematic reviews, and 5 randomized controlled trials (5 double-blind, n = 19,931 total participants).

Representative peer-reviewed findings include: • PMID:38458507 (2024) — "Investigating the influence of probiotics in preventing Traveler's diarrhea: Meta-analysis based systematic review." (Only a few probiotics that reduce TD risk exist.) • PMID:33295643 (2020) — "Probiotics for treating acute infectious diarrhoea." (BACKGROUND: Probiotics may be effective in reducing the duration of acute infectious diarrhoea.) • PMID:30278238 (2019) — "Are probiotics and prebiotics effective in the prevention of travellers' diarrhea: A systematic review and meta-analysis." (Only one of three probiotics showed significant efficacy for the prevention of TD.)

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)RR Effect Size & 95% CI DistributionEstimate (95% CI)PMID 332956430.49PMID 302782380.79PMID 204587570.47 (0.35–0.63)PMID 172989150.85 (0.79–0.91)PMID 412476861.12 (1.06–1.18)PMID 405355381.22PMID 402514861.08 (1.04–1.12)0.2Null (1)5Metric: RR
05

Formulation Selection, Dosing & Chronobiology

Recommended Formulation: Clinically Standardized Formulation. Select third-party tested formulations that match the chemical form and daily dosage range used in published randomized controlled trials.

Clinical Trial Dosing & Timing: Published studies most commonly utilize 20 mg · 750 mg · 250 mg · 400 mg over 14 days · 30 days · 3 months · 4 weeks. Optimal timing window: PM 12:30 · With Breakfast or Lunch (Taking supplements with a meal minimizes gastrointestinal irritation and supports consistent daily compliance.).

06

Body Response Monitoring & Dose Adjustment

Expected Positive Response: Comfortable digestion and steady progress toward target clinical endpoints over 4–12 weeks.

Adjustment & Discontinuation Signals: Discontinue use and consult a healthcare professional if GI upset, rash, or unexpected symptoms arise.

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 (PM 12:30 · With Breakfast or Lunch) with a full glass of water.
  • Stay within clinically studied daily dosages (20 mg · 750 mg · 250 mg) and re-evaluate efficacy after 14 days.
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 (23 Studies) · 20 Quantitative Analyses

01
META-ANALYSIS Travel medicine and infectious disease (2024) PMID: 38458507 ↗
Investigating the influence of probiotics in preventing Traveler's diarrhea: Meta-analysis based systematic review.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2024 Meta-Analysis published in Travel medicine and infectious disease. Key conclusion: Only a few probiotics that reduce TD risk exist.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 10-40 million travelers get Traveler's Diarrhea (TD) yearly. A significant decrease in TD incidence has not been achieved by depending solely on antibiotic prophylaxis and educational initiatives. Using prebiotics to prevent TD has also not been examined in previous evaluations of probiotics for TD, which failed to consider the strain-specificity of probiotic efficacy. This review investigates the overall effects of probiotics on preventing TD, including the impact of dosage, duration, and age. METHODS: Standard literature databases were searched without restriction on publication year or language. The following criteria are included: randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in English or non-English unrestricted to publication year, excluding animal and observational studies. This systematic review applied the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. RESULTS: Of the 166 screened papers, 10 RCTs were included. Lactobacillus acidophilus showed no efficacy in preventing TD except when mixed with other strains. Other genera of lactobacilli showed a protection rate of up to 39% against TD. Similarly, Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Saccharomyces boulardii have been effective in preventing TD. CONCLUSION: Studies investigating probiotics as a preventive measure for TD remain limited. Only a few probiotics that reduce TD risk exist. Based on this systematic review and meta-analysis, specific probiotic strains, including L. acidophilus, L. rhamnosus, L. fermentum, S. cerevisiae, and S. boulardii, may prevent TD. The effect of additional probiotic strains on TD prevention must be further investigated.

02
CLINICAL STUDY The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (2020) PMID: 33295643 ↗
Probiotics for treating acute infectious diarrhoea.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2020 Meta-Analysis published in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews involving n = 12,127 participants (RR 0.49). Key conclusion: BACKGROUND: Probiotics may be effective in reducing the duration of acute infectious diarrhoea.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Probiotics may be effective in reducing the duration of acute infectious diarrhoea. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of probiotics in proven or presumed acute infectious diarrhoea. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the trials register of the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group, MEDLINE, and Embase from inception to 17 December 2019, as well as the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 12, 2019), in the Cochrane Library, and reference lists from studies and reviews. We included additional studies identified during external review. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing a specified probiotic agent with a placebo or no probiotic in people with acute diarrhoea that is proven or presumed to be caused by an infectious agent. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently applied inclusion criteria, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. Primary outcomes were measures of diarrhoea duration (diarrhoea lasting ≥ 48 hours; duration of diarrhoea). Secondary outcomes were number of people hospitalized in community studies, duration of hospitalization in inpatient studies, diarrhoea lasting ≥ 14 days, and adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: We included 82 studies with a total of 12,127 participants. These studies included 11,526 children (age < 18 years) and 412 adults (three studies recruited 189 adults and children but did not specify numbers in each age group). No cluster-randomized trials were included. Studies varied in the definitions used for "acute diarrhoea" and "end of the diarrhoeal illness" and in the probiotic(s) tested. A total of 53 trials were undertaken in countries where both child and adult mortality was low or very low, and 26 where either child or adult mortality was high. Risk of bias was high or unclear in many studies, and there was marked statistical heterogeneity when findings for the primary outcomes were pooled in meta-analysis. Effect size was similar in the sensitivity analysis and marked heterogeneity persisted. Publication bias was demonstrated from funnel plots for the main outcomes. In our main analysis of the primary outcomes in studies at low risk for all indices of risk of bias, no difference w

03
META-ANALYSIS Travel medicine and infectious disease (2019) PMID: 30278238 ↗
Are probiotics and prebiotics effective in the prevention of travellers' diarrhea: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2019 Meta-Analysis published in Travel medicine and infectious disease; statistical significance reported at p = 0.001 (RR 0.79). Key conclusion: Only one of three probiotics showed significant efficacy for the prevention of TD.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Travellers' diarrhea (TD) impacts annually over 20 million tourists, business travellers and military troops on a worldwide basis. Reliance on antibiotic prophylaxis and educational programs has not lead to a significant reduction in TD rates. Previous reviews of probiotics for TD have not accounted for the strain-specificity of probiotic efficacy nor have investigated prebiotics for the prevention of TD. METHODS: Standard literature databases were searched from 1977 to June 2018 unrestricted by language. Inclusion criteria included: Probiotic, probiotic or symbiotic interventions, randomized, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and ≥2 RCTs with the same probiotic strain or mixture. RESULTS: Of 158 screened articles, 12 RCT were included in the systematic review and 6 RCTs (with nine treatment different arms) were included in the meta-analysis. Saccharomyces boulardii CNCM I-745 showed a significant reduction in TD incidence (RR = 0.79, 95% C.I. 0.72-0.87, p < 0.001), while L. rhamnosus GG showed a trend (p = 0.08) and L. acidophilus showed no significant (p = 0.16) reduction of TD. CONCLUSIONS: The number of trials using probiotics or prebiotics for the prevention of TD continues to be limited in number. Only one of three probiotics showed significant efficacy for the prevention of TD. More research is needed for other probiotics strains and prebiotics to determine if they could also prevent TD.

04
META-ANALYSIS World journal of gastroenterology (2010) PMID: 20458757 ↗
Systematic review and meta-analysis of Saccharomyces boulardii in adult patients.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2010 Meta-Analysis published in World journal of gastroenterology; statistical significance reported at p = 0.001 (RR 0.47). Key conclusion: Randomized trials also support the use of this yeast probiotic for prevention of enteral nutrition-related diarrhea and reduction of Helicobacter pylori treatment-related symptoms.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

12. World J Gastroenterol. 2010 May 14;16(18):2202-22. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v16.i18.2202. Systematic review and meta-analysis of Saccharomyces boulardii in adult patients. McFarland LV. This article reviews the evidence for efficacy and safety of Saccharomyces boulardii (S. boulardii) for various disease indications in adults based on the peer-reviewed, randomized clinical trials and pre-clinical studies from the published medical literature (Medline, Clinical Trial websites and meeting abstracts) between 1976 and 2009. For meta-analysis, only randomized, blinded controlled trials unrestricted by language were included. Pre-clinical studies, volunteer studies and uncontrolled studies were excluded from the review of efficacy and meta-analysis, but included in the systematic review. Of 31 randomized, placebo-controlled treatment arms in 27 trials (encompassing 5029 study patients), S. boulardii was found to be significantly efficacious and safe in 84% of those treatment arms. A meta-analysis found a significant therapeutic efficacy for S. boulardii in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) (RR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.35-0.63, P < 0.001). In adults, S. boulardii can be strongly recommended for the prevention of AAD and the traveler's diarrhea. Randomized trials also support the use of this yeast probiotic for prevention of enteral nutrition-related diarrhea and reduction of Helicobacter pylori treatment-related symptoms. S. boulardii shows promise for the prevention of C. difficile disease recurrences; treatment of irritable bowel syndrome, acute adult diarrhea, Crohn's disease, giardiasis, human immunodeficiency virus-related diarrhea; but more supporting evidence is recommended for these indications. The use of S. boulardii as a therapeutic probiotic is evidence-based for both efficacy and safety for several types of diarrhea.

05
META-ANALYSIS Travel medicine and infectious disease (2007) PMID: 17298915 ↗
Meta-analysis of probiotics for the prevention of traveler's diarrhea.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2007 Meta-Analysis published in Travel medicine and infectious disease; statistical significance reported at p = 0.001 (RR 0.85). Key conclusion: CONCLUSION: Several probiotics (Saccharomyces boulardii and a mixture of Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bifidobacterium bifidum) had significant efficacy.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Traveler's diarrhea (TD) is a common health complaint among travelers. Rates of TD can range from 5% to 50%, depending on the destination. The use of probiotics for this disease remains controversial. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of probiotics for the prevention of TD based on published randomized, controlled clinical trials. METHODS: PubMed, Google Scholar, metaRegister, NIH registry of clinical trials and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from 1977 to 2005, unrestricted by language. Secondary searches of reference lists, authors, reviews, commentaries, associated diseases, books and meeting abstracts. Inclusion criteria included: randomization, controlled, blinded, efficacy trials, in humans, peer-reviewed journals. Exclusion criteria were: pre-clinical, safety, phase 1 studies in volunteers, reviews, duplicate reports, trials of unspecified probiotics, trials of prebiotics, and inconsistent outcome measures. RESULTS: Twelve of 940 screened studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The pooled relative risk indicates that probiotics significantly prevent TD (RR=0.85, 95% CI 0.79,0.91, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Several probiotics (Saccharomyces boulardii and a mixture of Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bifidobacterium bifidum) had significant efficacy. No serious adverse reactions were reported in the 12 trials. Probiotics may offer a safe and effective method to prevent TD.

06
META-ANALYSIS The Lancet. Infectious diseases (2006) PMID: 16728323 ↗
Efficacy of probiotics in prevention of acute diarrhoea: a meta-analysis of masked, randomised, placebo-controlled trials.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2006 Meta-Analysis published in The Lancet. Infectious diseases. Key conclusion: The protective effect did not vary significantly among the probiotic strains Saccharomyces boulardii, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus bulgaricus, and other strains used alone or in combinations of two or more strains.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

To evaluate the evidence for the use of probiotics in the prevention of acute diarrhoea, we did a meta-analysis of the available data from 34 masked, randomised, placebo-controlled trials. Only one trial was community based and carried out in a developing country. Most of the remaining 33 studies were carried out in a developed country in a health-care setting. Evaluating the evidence by types of acute diarrhoea suggests that probiotics significantly reduced antibiotic-associated diarrhoea by 52% (95% CI 35-65%), reduced the risk of travellers' diarrhoea by 8% (-6 to 21%), and that of acute diarrhoea of diverse causes by 34% (8-53%). Probiotics reduced the associated risk of acute diarrhoea among children by 57% (35-71%), and by 26% (7-49%) among adults. The protective effect did not vary significantly among the probiotic strains Saccharomyces boulardii, Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus bulgaricus, and other strains used alone or in combinations of two or more strains. Although there is some suggestion that probiotics may be efficacious in preventing acute diarrhoea, there is a lack of data from community-based trials and from developing countries evaluating the effect on acute diarrhoea unrelated to antibiotic usage. The effect on acute diarrhoea is dependent on the age of the host and genera of strain used.

07
CLINICAL STUDY PloS one (2018) PMID: 30586435 ↗
Choosing an appropriate probiotic product for your patient: An evidence-based practical guide.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2018 Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) published in PloS one. Key conclusion: Strong evidence was also found for four types of probiotics for the prevention of a variety of other diseases/conditions (enteral-feed associated diarrhea, travellers' diarrhea, necrotizing enterocolits and side-effects associated with H.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

INTRODUCTION: Clinicians and patients face a daunting task when choosing the most appropriate probiotic for their specific needs. Available preparations encompass a diverse and continuously expanding product base, with most available products lacking evidence-based trials that support their use. Even when evidence exists, not all probiotic products are equally effective for all disease prevention or treatment indications. At this point in time, drug regulatory agencies offer limited assistance with regard to guidance and oversight in most countries, including the U.S. METHODS: We reviewed the current medical literature and sources on the internet to survey the types of available probiotic products and to determine which probiotics had evidence-based efficacy data. Standard medical databases from inception to June 2018 were searched and discussions with experts in the field were conducted. We graded the strength of the evidence for probiotics having multiple, randomized controlled trials and developed a guide for the practical selection of current probiotic products for specific uses. RESULTS: We found the efficacy of probiotic products is both strain-specific and disease-specific. Important factors involved in choosing the appropriate probiotic include matching the strain(s) with the targeted disease or condition, type of formulation, dose used and the source (manufacturing quality control and shelf-life). While we found many probiotic products lacked confirmatory trials, we found sufficient evidence for 22 different types of probiotics from 249 trials to be included. For example, several types of probiotics had strong evidence for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea [Saccharomyces boulardii I-745, a three-strain mixture (Lactobacillus acidophilus CL1285, L. casei Lbc80r, L. rhamnosus CLR2) and L. casei DN114001]. Strong evidence was also found for four types of probiotics for the prevention of a variety of other diseases/conditions (enteral-feed associated diarrhea, travellers' diarrhea, necrotizing enterocolits and side-effects associated with H. pylori treatments. The evidence was most robust for the treatment of pediatric acute diarrhea based on

08
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW Travel medicine and infectious disease (2015) PMID: 25805164 ↗
Probiotics for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in older patients: a systematic review.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2015 Systematic Review published in Travel medicine and infectious disease involving n = 3,562 participants. Key conclusion: However, with current published data, it is difficult to draw concrete conclusions.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVE: Here, we evaluated the efficacy of probiotic interventions in prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD) and Clostridium difficile diarrhoea (CDD) in older patients. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Web of Science were comprehensively searched from their dates of inception to May 2014. Only randomised controlled trials reporting data on probiotics including Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Saccharomyces, Streptococcus, Enterococcus, and Bacillus-alone or in combination-versus placebo or absence of treatment in older patients (age ≥65 years) were included. Risk ratios (RRs) for AAD and CDD relative to placebo or absence of treatment were estimated. RESULTS: Six trials with a total of 3562 patients were included. Only one trial showed that Bacillus licheniformis was effective for preventing AAD in older patients. However, there was no preventive effect for AAD and CDD with Lactobacillus acidophilus (Florajen), Lactobacillus casei Shirota, Saccharomyces cerevisiae (boulardii) lyo, mixture of Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bifidobacterium bifidum (Cultech strains), and mixture of Lactobacillus acidophilus CUL60, CUL21, Bifidobacterium bifidum CUL20 and B. lactis CUL34. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that probiotics may not reduce the risk of AAD and CDD in older patients. However, with current published data, it is difficult to draw concrete conclusions. To confirm these findings, sample sizes, multi-centre, double-blind studies that consider factors such as probiotic strains and types of antibiotics are required.

09
CLINICAL STUDY Infection and drug resistance (2026) PMID: 41971394 ↗
Vonoprazan-Amoxicillin Dual Therapy with or Without Saccharomyces boulardii Supplementation as a Rescue Regimen for Helicobacter pylori Infection.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) published in Infection and drug resistance involving n = 190 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.011. Key conclusion: pylori eradication rates and reduces adverse events, offering an effective and simple rescue treatment unaffected by previous treatment failures.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Whether the incorporation of Saccharomyces boulardii (S. boulardii) into vonoprazan-amoxicillin dual therapy contributes to improved eradication rate and a lower frequency of adverse events in rescue regimens for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection has yet to be established. METHODS: In a single-center, randomized controlled trial, 190 adults with previous H. pylori treatment failure were assigned to receive either vonoprazan (20 mg twice daily) plus amoxicillin (750 mg three times daily) (VA group) or the same regimen with S. boulardii (250 mg twice daily) (VAS group) for 14 days. Eradication rates, compliance, adverse events, and safety were assessed. Risk factors influencing the eradication rate were explored. RESULTS: Based on intention-to-treat analysis, H. pylori eradication rates were 80.0% in the VA group and 92.6% in the VAS group (P = 0.011), and per-protocol analysis yielded eradication rates of 85.4% and 94.6%, respectively (P = 0.037). There were no significant differences in eradication rates for either the VA regimen (P = 0.736) or the VAS regimen (P = 0.431) based on the number of previous treatment failures. However, a history of prior furazolidone use reduced the eradication rate of VAS therapy. The incidence of adverse events was significantly lower in the VAS group (11.6%) than it was in the VA group (32.6%; P < 0.001). Both groups showed similar good compliance and safety. CONCLUSION: Supplementing vonoprazan-amoxicillin dual therapy with S. boulardii significantly increases H. pylori eradication rates and reduces adverse events, offering an effective and simple rescue treatment unaffected by previous treatment failures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry No. ChiCTR2300075382, September 4, 2023. © 2026 Qu et al.

10
META-ANALYSIS Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons--Pakistan (2025) PMID: 41247686 ↗
Efficacy and Safety of <em>Saccharomyces Boulardii</em> with Standard Quadruple Therapy for Eradication of <em>Helicobacter Pylori </em>in Adults: Meta-Analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2025 Meta-Analysis published in Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons--Pakistan involving n = 2,295 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.01 (RR 1.12). Key conclusion: pylori infection and has shown significant efficacy and safety as an effective and safe treatment.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Helicobacter pylori is a class I carcinogen, strongly associated with gastric cancer, gastric ulcers, and gastric mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma. Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection necessitates effective eradication strategies. This study evaluated Saccharomyces boulardii (S. boulardii) as an adjunctive therapy to standard bismuth-containing quadruple therapy for H. pylori eradication. Comprehensive searches across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang Data, CBM, and Web of Science identified relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Analysis of 11 RCTs (n = 2,295 patients) demonstrated significantly higher eradication rates (78.6% to 89.2%) with adjunctive S. boulardii (n = 2,295; ITT analysis: RR = 1.12; 95% CI: 1.06-1.18; Z = 4.27, p <0.01) versus standard therapy alone. Crucially, the probiotic combination also substantially reduced treatment-related adverse events (n = 2,183; RR = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.28-0.74; Z = 3.16; p = 0.002), with pronounced reductions in diarrhoea (n = 2,091; RR = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.22-0.93; Z = 2.15; p = 0.03) and rash occurrence (n = 1,271; RR = 0.33; 95% CI: 0.14-0.77; Z = 2.55; p = 0.01). These findings support S. boulardii supplementation as an effective strategy that enhances standard bismuth quadruple therapy efficacy while mitigating gastrointestinal and dermatological complications in H. pylori management. Therefore, the combination of S. boulardii and bismuth-containing quadruple therapy was effective in the treatment of H. pylori infection and has shown significant efficacy and safety as an effective and safe treatment. Key Words: Saccharomyces boulardii, Helicobacter pylori, Bismuth, Quadruple therapy.

RELATED MONOGRAPHS

Related Monographs in This Category