Infant colic, excessive crying of unknown cause, is a major burden to families and effects about 10-30 % of infants. Despite decades of research, the exact cause and treatment of infant colic has remained elusive. The use of Lactobacillus reuteri (DSM 17938) in infant colic is somewhat controversial and hence, we designed this study to evaluate its efficacy in infantile colic. We recruited predominantly or exclusively breastfed infants, aged less than 4 months in a placebo controlled observational randomized study. Participants' were assigned to receive L. reuteri at a dose 10(8) colony forming units (n = 21) and placebo (n = 21). Placebo was an identical formulation without live micro-organisms. Treatment was given to subjects for 21 days and they were followed for 4 weeks. Treatment success (primary outcome), daily reduction in crying time, parent satisfaction and reduction in maternal depression (secondary outcomes) were assessed at the end of study period. Treatment success was observed in all infants (100 %) of the probiotic group while it was seen in 15.7 % of the placebo group. Mean daily crying time was more significantly reduced to 32.1 ± 8.3 min/day (P < 0.01) from 200.9 ± 6.3 min/day in the probiotic group as compared to the placebo group (120.6 ± 20.0 min/day). Moreover, throughout the study period, parent's satisfaction and improvement in maternal depression (Edinburgh postnatal depression scale) was also significantly higher in the probiotic group. In our study population, reduction in crying time was significant (P < 0.01) even during first week of initiation of therapy. We conclude that L. reuteri (DSM 17938) reduces daily crying time and maternal depression during infantile colic. We suggest L. reuteri may be a safe and efficacious option for reducing infant colic.
Objective Effects of conventional and atypical antipsychotics on bone mineral density (BMD) and serum prolactin levels (PRL) were examined in patients with schizophrenia. Methods One hundred and sixty-three first-episode inpatients with schizophrenia were recruited, to whom one of three conventional antipsychotics (perphenazine, sulpiride, and chlorpromazine) or one of three atypical antipsychotics (clozapine, quetiapine, and aripiprazole) was prescribed for 12 months as appropriate. BMD and PRL were tested before and after treatment. Same measures were conducted in 90 matched healthy controls. Results Baseline BMD of postero-anterior L1-L4 range from 1.04 ± 0.17 to 1.42 ± 1.23, and there was no significant difference between the patients group and healthy control group. However, post-treatment BMD values in patients (ranging from 1.02 ± 0.15 to 1.23 ± 0.10) were significantly lower than that in healthy controls (ranging from 1.15 ± 0.12 to 1.42 ± 1.36). The BMD values after conventional antipsychotics were significantly lower than that after atypical antipsychotics. The PRL level after conventional antipsychotics (53.05 ± 30.25 ng/ml) was significantly higher than that after atypical antipsychotics (32.81 ± 17.42 ng/ml). Conditioned relevance analysis revealed significant negative correlations between the PRL level and the BMD values after conventional antipsychotics. Conclusion The increase of PRL might be an important risk factor leading to a high prevalence of osteoporosis in patients with schizophrenia on long-term conventional antipsychotic medication.
The PRL-raising antipsychotic drug amisulpride influenced bone turnover balance very early in the course of treatment, which may require long-term monitoring of bone metabolism. Bone resorption marker changes induced by acute antipsychotic drug treatment are likely related to increased PRL levels.
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.