Skip to main content

Table 2 Main clinical characteristics related to the diagnosis of eczema in 15 trials included in the meta-analysis for the guideline’s Question 1: “Should probiotics vs. no probiotics be used in pregnant women?”.

From: A clinical reading on “World Allergy Organization-McMaster University Guidelines for Allergic Disease Prevention (GLAD-P): Probiotics”

References

Duration of follow up (months)

Diagnostic criteria for eczema

Patients evaluable at the end of follow-up period

Persistence of eczema

Allergic sensitization

PROBIOTIC

PLACEBO

P value

%

P value

Kalliomaki et al. 2001 [4]

24

Harrigan 1999

64/77

68/82 (Pl)

15/64 23 %

31/68 46 %

0.008

(sIgE)

27 % vs 25 % (Pl)

(SPT)

18 % vs 14 % (Pl)

NS

NS

Rautava et al. 2002 [5]a

24

Harrigan 1999

32

30 (Pl)

4/27 15 %

14/30 47 %

0.0098

(sIgE)

28 % vs 37 % (Pl)

(SPT)

23 % vs 21 % (Pl)

NS

NS

Abrahamsson et al. 2007 [6]

24

H-R

95/117

93/115(Pl)

36 %

IgE-Eczema

8 %

34 %

IgE-Eczema

20 %

NS

0.02

(sIgE)

37 % vs 48 %

(SPT)

18 % vs 29 %

NS

NS

Kukkonen et al. 2007 [7]

24

UK-WP

461/610

464/613 (Pl)

26 %

IgE-Eczema

12.4 %

32.3 %

IgE-Eczema

17.7 %

0.035

0.025

(sIgE e/o SPT)

28 % vs 31.2 (Pl)

NS

Huurre et al. 2008 [8]

12

H-R

72

68 (Pl)

9.7 %

17.6 %

NS

29 % vs 31 % (Pl)

Subgroup with maternal sensitization.

26 % vs 50 % (Pl)

NS

0.023

Marschan et al. 2008 [9]b

24

UK-WP

52

46 (Pl)

31 %

39 %

 

(sIgE)

35 % vs 26 % (Pl)

 

Wickens et al. 2008 [10]

24

UK-WP

144/157

152/158

150/159 (Pl)

Lrha 14.8 %

Bl 24.2 %

IgE-Eczema

Lrha 9.9 %

Bl 12.8 %

26.8 %

18.5 %

0.03

NS

0.04

NS

(SPT)

Lrha 21.3 % e

Bl 23.5 % vs 28.8 % (Pl)

NS

Kopp et al. 2008 [11]

24

UK-WP

50/54

44/51 (Pl)

28 %

27.3 %

NS

(sIgE to inhalants)

8 % vs 11.3 % (Pl)

NS

Niers et al. 2009 [12]

24

H-R

50/78

48/78 (Pl)

(Questionnaire)

3 months

12 %

24 months

54 %

(Clinical)

3 months

6 %

IgE-eczema

20 %

(Questionnaire)

3 months

29 %

24 months 68.7 %

(Clinical)

3 months

21 %

IgE-eczema

16.6 %

0.035

0.05

0.021

NS

(sIgE o SPT)

20 % vs 14.6 % (Pl)

NS

Dotterud et al. 2010 [13]

24

UK-WP

138/211

140/204 (Pl)

21 %

IgE-Eczema

6.9 %

Non IgE-Eczema

13 %

34.3 %

IgE-Eczema

7.5 %

Non IgE-Eczema

25.6 %

0.022

NS

0.009

(IgEs o SPT)

15.3 % vs 11.3 % (Pl)

NS

Kim et al. 2010 [14]

12

H -R

33/57

35/55 (Pl)

36.4 %

IgE-eczema

9.7 %

62.9 %

IgE-eczema

20.7 %

0.029

NS

(sIgE)

38.7 % vs 51.7 % (Pl)

NS

Boyle et al. 2011 [15]

12

UK-WP

109/125

103/125 (Pl)

32 %

42 %

NS

(SPT)

33 % vs 33 % (Pl)

NS

Ou et al. 2012 [16]

36

 

65/95

63/96 (Pl)

6 months

3.3 %

18 months 25 %

36 months 24.6 %

6 months

23.6 %

18 months

17.7 %

36 months

25 %

NS

NS

NS

Allergic symptoms

47.7 % vs 46.9 % (Pl)

NS

Allen et al. 2012 [17]

24

Clinical

187/220

172/234 (Pl)

34.1 %

IgE-eczema

5.3 %

32.4 %

IgE-eczema

12.1 %

NS

0.024

10.5 % vs 18.5 %

0.036

Rautava et al. 2012 [18]

24

H-R

73/81 (Lrha)

70/82 (Lpar)

62/78 (Pl)

29 % (10 %)*

29 % (6 %)*

71 % (26 %)*

0.001

0.001

(SPT) 22 %

26 %

26 % (Pl)

NS

  1. H-R: Hanifin and Rajka; UK-WP: UK Working Party; Harrigan 1999: Harrigan’s criteria [28]; Lrha: Lactobacillus rhamnosus; Bl: Bifidobacterium lactis; Lpar: Lactobacillus paracasei; Pl: Placebo; SPT: skin prick test; sIgE: specific IgE
  2. aAnalysis of a subgroup of patients previous analyzed by Kalliomaki et al. [4]
  3. bAnalysis of a subgroup of patients previous analyzed by Kukkonen et al. [7]
  4. *Persistence of eczema P < 0,003