Health benefits of probiotics: are mixtures more effective than single strains?

PURPOSE: Most studies on probiotics utilise single strains, sometimes incorporated into yoghurts. There are fewer studies on efficacy of mixtures of probiotic strains. This review examines the evidence that (a) probiotic mixtures are beneficial for a range of health-related outcomes and (b) mixtures are more or less effective than their component strains administered separately. RESULTS: Mixtures of probiotics had beneficial effects on the end points including irritable bowel syndrome and gut function, diarrhoea, atopic disease, immune function and respiratory tract infections, gut microbiota modulation, inflammatory bowel disease and treatment of Helicobacter pylori infection. However, only 16 studies compared the effect of a mixture with that of its component strains separately, although in 12 cases (75%), the mixture was more effective. CONCLUSION: Probiotic mixtures appear to be effective against a wide range of end points. Based on a limited number of studies, multi-strain probiotics appear to show greater efficacy than single strains, including strains that are components of the mixtures themselves. However, whether this is due to synergistic interactions between strains or a consequence of the higher probiotic dose used in some studies is at present unclear.

Health benefits of probiotics: are mixtures more effective than single strains?

Probiotic mixtures appear to be effective against a wide range of end points. Based on a limited number of studies, multi-strain probiotics appear to show greater efficacy than single strains, including strains that are components of the mixtures themselves. However, whether this is due to synergistic interactions between strains or a consequence of the higher probiotic dose used in some studies is at present unclear.

Probiotics and prebiotics

The human large intestine is an intensively colonised area containing bacteria that are health promoting, as well as pathogenic - This has led to functional food developments that fortify the former at the expense of the latter - Probiotics have a long history of use in humans as live microbial feed additions - In contrast, a prebiotic is a non digestible food ingredient that beneficially affects the host by targeting indigenous components thought to be positive - Dietary carbohydrates, such as fibres are candidate prebiotics but most promise has been realised with oligosaccharides - As prebiotics exploit non-viable food ingredients, their applicability in diets is wide ranging - As gastrointestinal disorders are prevalent in terms of human health, both probiotics and prebiotics serve an important role in the prophylactic management of various acute and chronic gut derived conditions - Examples include protection from gastroenteritis and some inflammatory conditions.

Recommendations for the viability assessment of probiotics as concentrated cultures and in food matrices

Due to the fact that probiotic cells need to be alive when they are consumed, culture-based analysis (plate count) is critical in ascertaining the quality (numbers of viable cells) of probiotic products. Since probiotic cells are typically stressed, due to various factors related to their production, processing and formulation, the standard methodology for total plate counts tends to underestimate the cell numbers of these products. Furthermore, products such as microencapsulated cultures require modifications in the release and sampling procedure in order to correctly estimate viable counts. This review examines the enumeration of probiotic bacteria in the following commercial products: powders, microencapsulated cultures, frozen concentrates, capsules, foods and beverages. The parameters which are specifically examined include: sample preparation (rehydration, thawing), dilutions (homogenization, media) and plating (media, incubation) procedures. Recommendations are provided for each of these analytical steps to improve the accuracy of the analysis. Although the recommendations specifically target the analysis of probiotics, many will apply to the analysis of commercial lactic starter cultures used in food fermentations as well.

In vitro evaluation of single- and multi-strain probiotics: inter-species inhibition between probiotic strains, and inhibition of pathogens

Many studies comparing the effects of single- and multi-strain probiotics on pathogen inhibition compare treatments with different concentrations. They also do not examine the possibility of inhibition between probiotic strains with a mixture. We tested the ability of 14 single-species probiotics to inhibit each other using a cross-streak assay, and agar spot test. We then tested the ability of 15 single-species probiotics and 5 probiotic mixtures to inhibit C. difficile, E. coli and S. Typhimurium, using the agar spot test. Testing was done with mixtures created in two ways: one group contained component species incubated together, the other group of mixtures was made using component species which had been incubated separately, equalised to equal optical density, and then mixed in equal volumes. Inhibition was observed for all combinations of probiotics, suggesting that when used as such there may be inhibition between probiotics, potentially reducing efficacy of the mixture. Significant inter-species variation was seen against each pathogen. When single species were tested against mixtures, the multi-species preparations displayed significantly (p<0.05 or less) greater inhibition of pathogens in 12 out of 24 cases. Despite evidence that probiotic species will inhibit each other when incubated together in vitro, in many cases a probiotic mixture was more effective at inhibiting pathogens than its component species when tested at approximately equal concentrations of biomass. This suggests that using a probiotic mixture might be more effective at reducing gastrointestinal infections, and that creating a mixture using species with different effects against different pathogens may have a broader spectrum of action that a single provided by a single strain.

Microencapsulation of probiotics for gastrointestinal delivery

The administration of probiotic bacteria as nutraceuticals is an area that has rapidly expanded in recent years, with a global market worth $32.6 billion predicted by 2014. Many of the health promoting claims attributed to these bacteria are dependent on the cells being both viable and sufficiently numerous in the intestinal tract. The oral administration of most bacteria results in a large loss of viability associated with passage through the stomach, which is attributed to the high acid and bile salt concentrations present. This loss of viability effectively lowers the efficacy of the administered supplement. The formulation of these probiotics into microcapsules is an emerging method to reduce cell death during GI passage, as well as an opportunity to control release of these cells across the intestinal tract. The majority of this technology is based on the immobilization of bacteria into a polymer matrix, which retains its structure in the stomach before degrading and dissolving in the intestine, unlike the diffusion based unloading of most controlled release devices for small molecules. This review shall provide an overview of progress in this field as well as draw attention to areas where studies have fallen short. This will be followed by a discussion of emerging trends in the field, highlighting key areas in which further research is necessary.

The potential mechanisms involved in the anti-carcinogenic action of probiotics

Probiotic bacteria are live microbial food ingredients that provide a health benefit to the consumer. In the past it was suggested that they served to benefit the host primarily through the prevention of intestinal infections. More recent studies have implicated probiotic bacteria in a number of other beneficial effects within the host including: *The suppression of allergies. *Control of blood cholesterol levels. *Modulation of immune function. *And the prevention of cancers of the colon. The reputed anti-carcinogenic effect of probiotics arises from in vivo studies in both animals and to a limited extent in man; this evidence is supported by in vitro studies with carcinoma cell lines and anti-mutagenicity assays. However, the mechanisms involved in any effect have thus far been difficult to elucidate; studies offer evidence for a variety of mechanisms; we have reviewed these and come to the opinion that, the anti-carcinogenic effect may not be attributable to a single mechanism but rather to a combination of events not yet fully elucidated or understood.

Antigenotoxicity of probiotics and prebiotics on faecal water-induced DNA damage in human colon adenocarcinoma cells

Six strains of lactic acid producing bacteria (LAB) were incubated (1 x 10(8)cfu/ml) with genotoxic faecal water from a human subject. HT29 human adenocarcinoma cells were then challenged with the resultant samples and DNA damage measured using the single cell gel electrophoresis (comet) assay. The LAB strains investigated were Bifidobacterium sp. 420, Bifidobacterium Bb12, Lactobacillus plantarum, Streptococcus thermophilus, Lactobacillus bulgaricus and Enterococcus faecium. DNA damage was significantly decreased by all bacteria used with the exception of Strep. thermophilus. Bif. Bb12 and Lact. plantarum showed the greatest protective effect against DNA damage. Incubation of faecal water with different concentrations of Bif. Bb12 and Lact. plantarum revealed that the decrease in genotoxicity was related to cell density. Non-viable (heat treated) probiotic cells had no effect on faecal water genotoxicity. In a second study, HT29 cells were cultured in the presence of supernatants of incubations of probiotics with various carbohydrates including known prebiotics; the HT29 cells were then exposed to faecal water. Overall, incubations involving Lact. plantarum with the fructooligosaccharide (FOS)-based prebiotics Inulin, Raftiline, Raftilose and Actilight were the most effective in increasing the cellular resistance to faecal water genotoxicity, whereas fermentations with Elixor (a galactooligosaccharide) and Fibersol (a maltodextrin) were less effective. Substantial reductions in faecal water-induced DNA damage were also seen with supernatants from incubation of prebiotics with Bif. Bb12. The supernatant of fermentations involving Ent. faecium and Bif. sp. 420 generally had less potent effects on genotoxicity although some reductions with Raftiline and Elixor fermentations were apparent.

In vitro evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of a range of probiotics against pathogens: Evidence for the effects of organic acids

The aim of this study was to investigate the antimicrobial properties of fifteen selected strains belonging to the Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Lactococcus, Streptococcus and Bacillus genera against Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogenic bacteria. In vitro antibacterial activity was initially investigated by an agar spot method. Results from the agar spot test showed that most of the selected strains were able to produce active compounds on solid media with antagonistic properties against Salmonella Typhimurium, Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis, Staphylococcus aureus and Clostridium difficile. These results were also confirmed when cell-free culture supernatants (CFCS) from the putative probiotics were used in an agar well diffusion assay. Neutralization of the culture supernatants with alkali reduced the antagonistic effects. These experiments are able to confirm the capacity of potential probiotics to inhibit selected pathogens. One of the main inhibitory mechanisms may result from the production of organic acids from glucose fermentation and consequent lowering of culture pH. This observation was confirmed when the profile of organic acids was analysed demonstrating that lactic and acetic acid were the principal end products of probiotic metabolism. Furthermore, the assessment of the haemolytic activity and the susceptibility of the strains to the most commonly used antimicrobials, considered as basic safety aspects, were also studied. The observed antimicrobial activity was mainly genus-specific, additionally significant differences could be observed among species.