Loading…
We use essential cookies (authentication, your saved goals/stack) by default. With your permission we’ll also enable privacy-respecting analytics (Vercel Web Analytics, anonymous load-time metrics) and error-replay diagnostics (Sentry — DOM snapshots only when an error fires) so we can fix bugs faster. Learn more about cookies
Head-to-head evidence comparison — which supplement is right for you?
B. infantis 35624 vs L. reuteri DSM 17938: L. reuteri DSM 17938 has the stronger overall evidence (6 vs 5/10); they're alternatives for improve digestion — the best pick depends on your goals. Take the 60-second quiz for a pick tailored to your goals.
L. reuteri DSM 17938 wins 2 of 3 categories. Both are solid choices — the best pick depends on your specific goals.
Verdict
Mostly mechanism / observational
Top outcomes
Verdict
Mostly mechanism / observational
Top outcomes
Shared outcomes (1)
Outcomes where both B. infantis 35624 and L. reuteri DSM 17938 have evidence — compare verdict strength side-by-side.
1 x 10^8 CFU (100 million) daily — the dose that won the only head-to-head dose comparison; 1 x 10^10 CFU also beat placebo in a separate trial, so higher doses are not ruled out
any
Freeze-dried capsule standardized to 35624 at 1 x 10^8 CFU
1 x 10^8 CFU daily (5 drops) for infant colic — the dose used in every positive trial
any
Oil-suspension drops standardized to DSM 17938
4 weeks
4 weeks
n/a
n/a
1-3 weeks
n/a
1-3 days
4 weeks
Efficacy of an encapsulated probiotic Bifidobacterium infantis 35624 in women with irritable bowel syndrome.
Am J Gastroenterol (2006) · Rct · n=362
1 x 10^8 CFU significantly superior to placebo AND to all other doses for the primary endpoint of abdominal pain
Lactobacillus and bifidobacterium in irritable bowel syndrome: symptom responses and relationship to cytokine profiles.
Gastroenterology (2005) · Rct · n=77
Beat placebo on composite score and on abdominal pain, bloating/distention and bowel-movement difficulty for most treatment weeks
Efficacy of Bifidobacterium infantis 35624 in patients with irritable bowel syndrome: a meta-analysis.
Curr Med Res Opin (2017) · Meta analysis
Single-strain 35624 had no effect on abdominal pain, bloating/distention, or bowel-habit satisfaction
Lactobacillus reuteri to Treat Infant Colic: A Meta-analysis.
Pediatrics (2018) · Meta analysis
Day-21 adjusted mean difference in cry/fuss time: -25.4 min/day (95% CI -47.3 to -3.5)
Treating infant colic with the probiotic Lactobacillus reuteri: double blind, placebo controlled randomised trial.
BMJ (2014) · Rct · n=167
Probiotic group cried/fussed 49 minutes MORE than placebo at 1 month (95% CI 8 to 90, P=0.02)
Probiotics to prevent infantile colic.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2019) · Meta analysis
No difference in new cases of colic: RR 0.46 (95% CI 0.18-1.19), low certainty
L. reuteri DSM 17938 has a higher evidence score (6/10 vs 5/10) and wins in 2 of 3 categories.
For improve digestion, B. infantis 35624 has a higher relevance score (58 vs 55).
No known interactions between B. infantis 35624 and L. reuteri DSM 17938 have been documented in our database. However, always consult a healthcare provider before combining supplements.
The right pick depends on your goals. Answer a few quick questions for a personalised recommendation — or dig into the full evidence on each.