Wir verwenden standardmäßig essenzielle Cookies (Anmeldung, deine gespeicherten Ziele/Stacks). Mit deiner Erlaubnis aktivieren wir außerdem datenschutzfreundliche Analytik (Vercel Web Analytics, anonyme Ladezeit-Metriken) und Fehler-Replay-Diagnostik (Sentry — DOM-Snapshots nur, wenn ein Fehler auftritt), damit wir Bugs schneller beheben können. Mehr über Cookies erfahren

Lai5.0

L. acidophilus – Forschung

Überwiegend Mechanismus / Beobachtung

5 begutachtete Studien

Was die Evidenz sagt

Überwiegend Mechanismus / Beobachtung

Die meisten Studien zu L. acidophilus sind mechanistisch oder beobachtend statt RCTs, die einen klinischen Effekt messen — betrachte die Ergebnisse als vorläufig.

Die meiste Evidenz stammt aus hochwertigen randomisierten Studien, veröffentlicht 1999–2020.

Basierend auf 5 Studien · 4 RCTs

Konfidenz

Mittlere Konfidenz

Nach Outcome

Digestive healthIn einzelnen randomisierten Studien mit benannten Stämmen wurde eine symptomatische Linderung bei Laktoseintoleranz sowie eine Verringerung der Bauchschmerzen bei Reizdarmsyndrom berichtet; das Ausmaß des Nutzens wurde in diesem Eintrag nicht übernommen · Hier nicht belegt — die Studiendauern wurden nicht übernommen
Zu wenige bewertete Studien1 Studie
Safety profile
Zu wenige bewertete Studien1 Studie
Pain & analgesia
Zu wenige bewertete Studien1 Studie

Ältere Forschungsbasis

Neueste Studie von 2020

199920092020

1RCTCited 262×2013

Einfach gesagt: The NIHR Health Technology Assessment monograph for this trial states: 'We found no evidence that probiotic administration was effective in preventing AAD.'

Allen SJ et al. · Lancet (2013)

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicentre trial in inpatients aged 65 and over (PubMed publication types: Randomized Controlled Trial, Multicenter Study)
2,981 patients across 5 UK NHS hospitals; antibiotic-associated diarrhoea occurred in 159/1470 (10.8%) on probiotic versus 153/1471 (10.4%) on placebo, relative risk 1.04 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.28), p=0.71 — as reported in the NIHR HTA monograph (NCBI Bookshelf NBK261330)
The intervention is described there as two strains of lactobacilli and two strains of bifidobacteria at 6 x 10^10 organisms per day; the species are NOT named in the reachable report text, so whether L. acidophilus was among them is unconfirmed

Quelle ansehen Kostenloser Volltext

2Systematische ÜbersichtCited 181×2011

Einfach gesagt: The report concludes that 'the current literature is not well equipped to answer questions on the safety of probiotic interventions with confidence', while finding no statistically significant increase in adverse events in randomised trials (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.07).

Hempel S, Newberry S, Ruelaz A, et al. (AHRQ Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 200) · Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) (2011)

AHRQ Evidence Report / Technology Assessment No. 200 — the authoritative safety synthesis for probiotics as a class
Randomised trials showed no statistically significant increase in the relative risk of experienced adverse events: RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.93 to 1.07), p=0.999
Case studies described fungaemia and some bacteraemia potentially associated with administered probiotic organisms, and suggested participants with compromised health are most likely to experience adverse events

3RCTCited 89×2020

Einfach gesagt: The paper's own title states the result: L. acidophilus DDS-1 and B. lactis UABla-12 improve abdominal pain severity and symptomology in irritable bowel syndrome.

Martoni CJ et al. · Nutrients (2020)

Multicentre randomised controlled trial in irritable bowel syndrome (PubMed publication types: Randomized Controlled Trial, Multicenter Study)
The direction of the result is stated in the title, so it is grounded without reading the abstract
Tested a TWO-STRAIN blend — DDS-1 with Bifidobacterium lactis UABla-12 — so it does not isolate L. acidophilus

Quelle ansehen Kostenloser Volltext

4CrossoverCited 52×2016

Einfach gesagt: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial of the DDS-1 strain for symptomatic relief in lactose intolerance — the design is stated in the title.

Pakdaman MN et al. · Nutr J (2016)

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial (PubMed publication types: Randomized Controlled Trial)
Single named strain, DDS-1, rather than a blend — the cleanest species-specific human trial cited here
Outcome is symptomatic relief in lactose intolerance

Quelle ansehen Kostenloser Volltext

5RCTCited 160×1999

Einfach gesagt: The classic randomised trial of fermented milk carrying L. acidophilus L1 against serum cholesterol in hypercholesterolaemic humans.

Anderson JW, Gilliland SE · J Am Coll Nutr (1999)

Randomised controlled trial in hypercholesterolaemic humans (PubMed publication types: Randomized Controlled Trial, Clinical Trial, Comparative Study)
Cited as the outcome anchor for the cholesterol claim, which this entry does not otherwise make: no goal is mapped for it
Delivered as fermented milk carrying a named strain (L1), not as a capsule

Quelle ansehen

In der Forschungsbibliothek ansehen

L. acidophilus – Forschung

Überwiegend Mechanismus / Beobachtung

Lactobacilli and bifidobacteria in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea and Clostridium difficile diarrhoea in older inpatients (PLACIDE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial.

Safety of probiotics used to reduce risk and prevent or treat disease.

Lactobacillus acidophilus DDS-1 and Bifidobacterium lactis UABla-12 Improve Abdominal Pain Severity and Symptomology in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Randomized Controlled Trial.

The effects of the DDS-1 strain of lactobacillus on symptomatic relief for lactose intolerance - a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover clinical trial.

Effect of fermented milk (yogurt) containing Lactobacillus acidophilus L1 on serum cholesterol in hypercholesterolemic humans.