Effects of probiotics, prebiotics or synbiotics on jawbone in obese-insulin resistant rats

Eaimworawuthikul, Sathima; Tunapong, Wannipa; Chunchai, Titikorn; Yasom, Sakawdaurn; Wanchai, Keerati; Suntornsaratoon, Panan; Charoenphandhu, Narattaphol; Thiennimitr, Parameth; Chattipakorn, Nipon; Chattipakorn, Siriporn C.

doi:10.1007/s00394-018-1829-4

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These different findings might be due to different age, sex, estrogen status, duration of intervention, and sample sizes. In terms of BMD, increased BMD in different sites were reported in previous publications, total [ 34 , 35 , 44 , 51 , 55 ], tibia [ 12 , 30 – 32 , 35 , 54 , 59 ], femur [ 30 , 31 , 49 , 59 ], and calcaneus [ 35 ]. An increase in BMC was also reported in five investigations [ 30 , 31 , 40 , 43 , 57 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…In fourteen investigations, female rats had ovariectomy surgery that induced osteoporosis [ 36 , 37 , 39 , 40 , 42 , 44 , 47 , 51 , 56 , 57 , 59 , 62 , 66 ], and in two studies, diabetic rats were included [ 38 , 45 ]. Animals were fed by L. reuteri [ 30 , 31 , 40 , 43 , 45 , 46 , 56 , 57 , 64 ], L. casei [ 34 , 38 – 40 , 51 , 63 ], L. paracasei [ 42 , 44 , 54 , 65 ], L. plantarum [ 42 , 47 , 63 , 65 ] , L. acidophilus [ 40 , 55 , 59 , 67 ] , B. bifidum [ 40 , 53 , 55 , 63 ], B. longum [ 37 , 47 , 52 , 53 ], B. subtilis [ 28 , 29 , 55 ], L. helveticus [ 32 , 37 , 41 ], L. bulgaricus [ 33 , 35 , 63 ], Entrococcos faecium [ 30 , 31 , 55 ], and L. rhamnosus [ 48 , 49 , ...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of them were performed on rats except for four studies performed on chicks and hens [28][29][30][31]. Target species of rats were Sprague-Dawley in 10 studies [32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41], C57BL/6J mice in 9 studies [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50], Wistar rat in 5 studies [51][52][53][54][55], and BALB/c mice in 5 studies [56][57][58][59]. e other studies used senescence-accelerated mouse (SAMP) [60,61], virgin fisher rat [62], and ND4 Swiss Webster retired breeder mice [63].…”

Section: Animal Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Probiotics as a New Regulator for Bone Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Malmir

Ejtahed

Soroush

et al. 2021

Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the proposed role of the gut microbiota-bone axis, findings on the association between probiotic consumption and bone health are conflicting. This systematic review aimed to assess the effect of probiotic consumption on bone health parameters. A systematic literature search of relevant reports published in PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and Google scholar before December 2020 was conducted. All clinical trials or experimental studies, which examined the relationship between probiotic consumption and bone health parameters, were included. No limitation was applied during the search. After screening articles based on inclusion criteria, 44 studies remained. In clinical trials, probiotic consumption affects bone health parameters such as serum calcium levels (3.82; 95% CI: 1.05, 6.59 mmol/l), urinary calcium levels (4.85; 95% CI: 1.16, 8.53 mmol/l), and parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels (−5.53; 95% CI: −9.83, −0.86 ng/l). In most studies, Lactobacillus species such as L. helveticus, L. reuteri, and L. casei were consumed and women aged 50 years or older were assessed. Spinal and total hip bone mineral density (BMD) was not affected significantly by probiotic consumption. In 37 animal experiments, probiotic or symbiotic feeding mostly had effects on bone health parameters. Some strains of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus including L. reuteri, L. casei, L. paracasei, L. bulgaricus, and L. acidophilus have indicated beneficial effects on bone health parameters. In conclusion, this systematic review and meta-analysis indicate that probiotic supplementation might improve bone health. Further studies are needed to decide on the best probiotic species and appropriate dosages.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Animal Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Probiotics as a New Regulator for Bone Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Malmir

Ejtahed

Soroush

et al. 2021

Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These documents were thoroughly analyzed for estimating the more common probiotic species used in obesity ( Figure 2 ), calculating average doses ( Figure 3 ) and pattern of administrations ( Figure 4 ) to obtain comparative conclusions from human and animal clinical studies ( Table 1 (6 CT), Table S2 (9 animal studies)). In order to obtain a more robust outcome, we included also data retrieved from nine reports containing a total of 47 suitable studies for the pursued analysis, summarized in the Table S3 , 5 clinical studies [ 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 ] and 4 systematic reviews providing 12 studies from Cerdó et al [ 41 ], 4 from Tenorio et al [ 13 ], 7 from Sanz et al [ 42 ], 20 studies from Koutnikova et al [ 43 ]. None of these studies contained specific information on microbiota modulation capacities, so they could not be directly included for the main final microbiota analysis.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probiotic Strains and Intervention Total Doses for Modulating Obesity-Related Microbiota Dysbiosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Obesity is a growing health threat worldwide. Administration of probiotics in obesity has also parallelly increased but without any protocolization. We conducted a systematic review exploring the administration pattern of probiotic strains and effective doses for obesity-related disorders according to their capacity of positively modulating key biomarkers and microbiota dysbiosis. Manuscripts targeting probiotic strains and doses administered for obesity-related disorders in clinical studies were sought. MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched using keywords during the last fifteen years up to April 2020. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and then full-text papers against inclusion criteria according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. From 549 interventional reports identified, we filtered 171 eligible studies, from which 24 full-text assays were used for calculating intervention total doses (ITD) of specific species and strains administered. Nine of these reports were excluded in the second-step because no specific data on gut microbiota modulation was found. Six clinical trials (CT) and 9 animal clinical studies were retained for analysis of complete outcome prioritized (body mass index (BMI), adiposity parameters, glucose, and plasma lipid biomarkers, and gut hormones). Lactobacillus spp. administered were double compared to Bifidobacterium spp.; Lactobacillus as single or multispecies formulations whereas most Bifidobacteria only through multispecies supplementations. Differential factors were estimated from obese populations’ vs. obesity-induced animals: ITD ratio of 2 × 106 CFU and patterns of administrations of 11.3 weeks to 5.5 weeks, respectively. Estimation of overall probiotics impact from selected CT was performed through a random-effects model to pool effect sizes. Comparisons showed a positive association between the probiotics group vs. placebo on the reduction of BMI, total cholesterol, leptin, and adiponectin. Moreover, negative estimation appeared for glucose (FPG) and CRP. While clinical trials including data for positive modulatory microbiota capacities suggested that high doses of common single and multispecies of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium ameliorated key obesity-related parameters, the major limitation was the high variability between studies and lack of standardized protocols. Efforts in solving this problem and searching for next-generation probiotics for obesity-related diseases would highly improve the rational use of probiotics.

show abstract

“…It is a pathological state of excessive adipose tissue accumulation, which increases the risks of multiple diseases, such as cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis and type 2 diabetes [ 2 ]. Previous studies have shown that obesity has a negative impact on bone, including increased bone differentiation, decreased bone mineral density (BMD), and increased risks of fractures [ 3 , 4 ]. A variety of adipokines, pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines secreted by adipose tissue may be part of the main reasons for the increased risks of osteoporosis caused by obesity [ 5 – 10 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of sleeve gastrectomy on bone mass, microstructure of femurs and bone metabolism associated serum factors in obese rats

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is a profoundly effective operation for severe obese patients, but is closely associated with bone mass loss. Previous studies have reported changes of various serum factors which may be associated with bone mass loss after SG. However, those results are contradictory. In this study, we assessed the effects of SG on bone mass, microstructure of femurs, and changes in bone turnover markers (BTMs), serum adipokines, inflammatory factors and gastrointestinal hormones after SG in high-fat diet (HFD) induced obese rats. Methods Eight-week-old male Sprague–Dawley (SD) rats were fed with HFD to induce obesity. Then, SG and sham surgery were performed in anesthetized obese rats. SD rats in control group were fed with standard chow. Microstructure of femurs was scanned and analyzed by micro-computed tomography in control group, HFD sham group and HFD SG group. Serum inflammatory factors, adipokines markers, gastrointestinal hormones and BTMs were also measured. Results Bone mineral density (BMD) of trabecular bone in both HFD sham group and HFD SG group were remarkably decreased compared with control group. All serum BTMs were significantly higher in HFD SG group than HFD sham group. In the meantime, serum levels of several important inflammatory factors, gastrointestinal hormones and adipokines such as tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), interleukin (IL)-6, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1(MCP-1), ghrelin, insulin and leptin in HFD SG group were remarkably reduced compared with HFD sham group, whereas glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), adiponectin, fibroblast growth factor (FGF)-19 and FGF-21 were dramatically increased after SG. Protein tyrosine phosphatase 1B (PTP1B) was significantly increased in the HFD sham group than control group. Spearman’s correlation analysis indicated that serum osteocalcin (OC) and 25-hydroxy vitamin D3 (25(OH)D3) were positively correlated with BMD of trabecular bone, whereas serum PTP1B and TNF-α were negatively related to BMD of trabecular bone. Conclusions SG aggravates bone mass loss and activates bone remodeling in obese rats. Levels of BTMs, adipokines, inflammatory factors, and gastrointestinal hormones could be affected by SG in obese rats. Serum PTP1B level might be associated with abnormal bone mass in obese rats.

show abstract

Effects of probiotics, prebiotics or synbiotics on jawbone in obese-insulin resistant rats

Cited by 13 publications

References 42 publications

Probiotics as a New Regulator for Bone Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Probiotics as a New Regulator for Bone Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Probiotic Strains and Intervention Total Doses for Modulating Obesity-Related Microbiota Dysbiosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Effects of sleeve gastrectomy on bone mass, microstructure of femurs and bone metabolism associated serum factors in obese rats

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About