Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35445065›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in nutrition2022

Probiotics, Prebiotics, and Synbiotics Improve Uremic, Inflammatory, and Gastrointestinal Symptoms in End-Stage Renal Disease With Dialysis: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Zixian Yu, Jin Zhao, Yunlong Qin, Yuwei Wang, Yumeng Zhang, Shiren Sun

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Supplementation withThe veterinary quarterly · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Zixian YuDepartment of Nephrology, Xijing Hospital, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Jin ZhaoDepartment of Nephrology, Xijing Hospital, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Yunlong QinDepartment of Nephrology, Xijing Hospital, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Yuwei WangDepartment of Nephrology, Xijing Hospital, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Yumeng ZhangDepartment of Nephrology, Xijing Hospital, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Shiren SunDepartment of Nephrology, Xijing Hospital, Air Force Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Xijing Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics are three different supplements to treat end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients by targeting gut bacteria. The comprehensive comparison of the effectiveness of different supplements are lacking. Objectives: The purpose of this network meta-analysis (NMA) is to assess and rank the efficacy of probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics on inflammatory factors, uremic toxins, and gastrointestinal symptoms (GI symptoms) in ESRD patients undergoing dialysis. Methods: Randomized clinical trials were searched from the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials databases, from their inception until 4 September 2021. Random-effect model were used to obtain all estimated outcomes in network meta-analysis (NMA). Effect estimates were presented as mean differences (Mean ± SD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The comprehensive effects of all treatments were ranked by the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. Results: Twenty-five studies involved 1,106 participants were included. Prebiotics were superior in decreasing Interleukin-6 (IL-6; SMD -0.74, 95% CI [-1.32, -0.16]) and tumor-necrosis factor-α (TNF-α; SMD -0.59, 95% CI [-1.09, -0.08]), synbiotics were more effective in declining C-reactive protein (CRP; SMD -0.69, 95% CI [-1.14, -0.24]) and endotoxin (SMD -0.83, 95% CI [-1.38, -0.27]). Regarding uremic toxins, prebiotics ranked highest in reducing indoxyl sulfate (IS; SMD -0.43, 95% CI [-0.81, -0.05]), blood urea nitrogen (BUN; SMD -0.42, 95% CI [-0.78, -0.06]), and malondialdehyde (MDA; SMD -1.88, 95% CI [-3.02, -0.75]). Probiotics were rated as best in alleviating GI symptoms (SMD: -0.52, 95% CI [-0.93, -0.1]). Conclusion: Our research indicated prebiotics were more effective in declining IL-6, TNF-α, IS, MDA, and BUN, synbiotics lowering CRP and endotoxin significantly, and probiotics were beneficial for alleviating GI symptoms, which may contribute to better clinical decisions. This study was registered in PROSPERO (Number: CRD42021277056). Systematic Review Registration: [http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO], identifier [CRD42021277056].

Indexed as

end-stage renal disease (ESRD)network meta-analysisprebioticprobioticsynbiotic

Identifiers

PMID35445065
PMCPMC9015659
OpenAlexW4225682230

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.