Lactobacillus acidophilus, Bifidobacterium lactis and Lactobacillus F19 prevent antibiotic-associated ecological disturbances of Bacteroides fragilis in the intestine

56Citations
Citations of this article
59Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare the effect of clindamycin on the intestinal microflora in subjects ingesting yogurt with added probiotic microorganisms with the microflora in subjects ingesting placebo yogurt. Materials and methods: Twenty-four healthy subjects were included in the study. All subjects received 150 mg clindamycin four times daily for 7 days and 250 mL yogurt twice daily for 14 days. Faecal samples were collected before, during and after administration of clindamycin. Results: In the aerobic intestinal microflora, the numbers of enterococci increased after treatment in both groups, whereas other Gram-positive microorganisms decreased. In both groups, the numbers of Escherichia coli also decreased, whereas there was a concomitant increase in numbers of other Gram-negative bacilli. In the anaerobic microflora in subjects receiving yogurt with added microorganisms, the numbers of lactobacilli and bacteroides remained at the same levels throughout the study, whereas the numbers decreased in the placebo group. Other anaerobic bacteria decreased in both groups. The minimum inhibitory concentration of clindamycin against strains of bacteroides increased in both groups during the study. Conclusions: The probiotic microorganisms evaluated in this study prevented ecological disturbances in the numbers of intestinal Bacteroides fragilis group species during clindamycin administration.

Author supplied keywords

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sullivan, Å., Barkholt, L., & Nord, C. E. (2003). Lactobacillus acidophilus, Bifidobacterium lactis and Lactobacillus F19 prevent antibiotic-associated ecological disturbances of Bacteroides fragilis in the intestine. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 52(2), 308–311. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkg346

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free