Table 3.
Relative ranking of eight probiotic strains assessed using SUCRA values.
| Probiotic strains | VAP (%) | Hospital mortality (%) | ICU mortality (%) | ICU length of stay (%) | Diarrhea (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Synbiotic 2000 FORTE | 2 | 31 | 46 | 72 | 26 |
| Lac.pla | 4 | 14 | 5 | 3 | NA |
| Lac.rha | 3 | 17 | 28 | 5 | 45 |
| Lac.cas | 5 | NA | NA | NA | 2 |
| Ergyphilus | 1 | 7 | 18 | 7 | 3 |
| Bif + Lac + Str | 66 | 25 | NA | 12 | NA |
| Bac + Ent | 8 | 6 | 2 | NA | 24 |
| Bif + Lac + Ent | 11 | NA | NA | NA | NA |
P-values in bold and underlined are significant; Lac.pla = Lactobacillus plantarum, Lac.rha = Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lac.cas = Lactobacillus casei, Bif + Lac + Str = Bifidobacterium longum + Lactobacillus bulgaricus + Streptococcus thermophilus, Bac + Ent = Bacillus subtilis + Enterococcus faecalis, Bif + Lac + Ent = Bifidobacterium + Lactobacillus + Enterococcus, NA = Not available.