Summary
Background
Constipation is a prevalent gastrointestinal disorder. Patient dissatisfaction with prescribed medications is common, and there is need for alternative management strategies. Evidence shows that Bifidobacterium species may be beneficial in constipation.
Aim
To investigate changes in physiological and clinical measures of gut function in patients with chronic constipation following the consumption of Bifidobacterium lactis NCC2818, compared to placebo.
Methods
Participants were randomised to a 4‐week supplementation with B. lactis NCC2818 (1.5 x 1010 CFU/d) or placebo. Gut transit time was measured using a radio‐opaque marker, while symptoms and quality of life were assessed using validated questionnaires. Gut microbiota composition was assessed using quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Analysis of covariance was used for normally distributed variables, and Mann‐Whitney test for non‐normally distributed variables.
Results
Seventy‐five participants were randomised. There was no significant difference between the probiotic and placebo groups in gut transit time change from baseline to week 2 (−11.7 hours, SD 33.0 hours vs −12.9 hours, SD 33.6 hours; P = 0.863) or to week 4 (−20.4 hours, SD 32.5 h vs −8.7 hours, SD 33.8 hours; P = 0.103). There were also no improvements in stool output, symptoms, or quality of life. No differences were found in Bifidobacterium concentrations between the probiotic and placebo groups at week 4 (9.5 log10/g dry faeces, SD 0.3 vs 9.4 log10/g, SD 1.0; P = 0.509).
Conclusions
Bifidobacterium lactis NCC2818 was not effective in the management of mild chronic constipation. This study highlights the importance of further studies and their publication to better understand the strain‐specific effects of probiotics.
ObjectiveColonic enteroendocrine cells (EECs) store and release potent anorectic hormones that are key regulators of satiety. EECs express multiple nutrient sensing receptors, particularly for medium-chain fatty acids (MCFAs): GPR84 and FFAR4. Here we show a non-surgical approach with targeted colonic delivery of MCFA, which induces EEC and neuronal activation leading to anorectic effects.DesignA randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study was performed in obese adults given combined GPR84 and FFAR4 agonists in colonic release capsules before meals. We measured serum hormones, energy intake and appetite perception. Cell type, activation by agonists and hormone/serotonin release were determined in human colonic explants. Mouse colonic afferent nerve responses to nutrients/mediators were recorded electrophysiologically.ResultsSubjects receiving GPR84 and FFAR4 agonists had reduced overall calorific intake and increased postprandial levels of PYY versus placebo. Receptors including GPR84 and FFAR4 were coexpressed on human colonic EEC. Activation of GPR84 exclusively induced intracellular pERK, whereas FFAR4 selectively activated pCaMKII. Coactivation of GPR84 and FFAR4 induced both phosphoproteins, and superadditive release of GLP-1 and PYY. Nutrients and hormones convergently activated murine colonic afterent nerves via GLP-1, Y2 and 5-HT3 receptors.ConclusionsColonic GPR84 and FFAR4 agonists reduce energy intake and increase postprandial PYY in obese adults. Human colonic EECs coexpress these receptors, which activate cells via parallel intracellular pathways and synergistically evoke hormone release. Further synergism occurs in sensory nerve responses to MCFA and EEC mediators. Thus, synergistic activation of colonic endocrine cells via nutrient receptors is an important target for metabolic regulation.Trail registration numberNCT04292236.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.