Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Overview of the used definitions of VAP

From: Manipulation of the microbiome in critical illness—probiotics as a preventive measure against ventilator-associated pneumonia

Author, yearStudy designN (intervention vs. control)Analyzed N (intervention vs. control)Details of interventionPrimary outcome
Barraud et al., 2010 [26]Blinded RCT87 vs. 8087 vs. 80Bifidobacterium bifidum, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus casei, and Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG, 1/day 2 × 1010 CFU in the stomach28-day mortality
Forestier et al., 2008 [27]Blinded RCT118 vs. 118102 vs. 106Lactobacillus casei rhamnosus, 1/day 1 × 109 CFU in the mouth and stomachTime of first Pseudomonas aeruginosa acquisition
Klarin et al., 2008 [28]Open-label RCT25 vs. 2523 vs. 21Lactobacillus plantarum 299, 2/day 1 × 1010 CFU in the mouthSubsequent samples
Knight et al., 2009 [33]Blinded RCT150 vs. 150130 vs. 129Lactobacillus paracasei, Lactobacillus plantarum, Leuconostoc mesenteroides, and Pediococcus pentosaceus, 2/day 1 × 1010 CFU in the stomachVAP
Morrow et al., 2010 [29]Blinded RCT73 vs. 7368 vs. 70Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG,,2/day 1 × 109 CFU in the oropharynx and stomachVAP incidence
Rongrungruang et al., 2015 [32]Open-label RCT75 vs. 7575 vs. 75Lactobacillus casei Shirota, 1/day 8 × 109 CFU in the mouth and stomachVAP
Shinotsuka et al., 2008 [30]Open-label RCT16 vs. 1212 vs. 16Lactobacillus johnsonii La1, 2/day 1 × 109 CFU in the stomachColonization of gastrointestinal tract and trachea
Zeng et al., 2016 [31]Open-label RCT125 vs. 125118 vs. 117Bacillus subtilis and Enterococcus faecalis, 3/day 9 × 109 in the stomachVAP