Skip to main content
. 2022 Feb;11(2):249–259. doi: 10.21037/tp-22-27

Table 1. Basic characteristics of included studies and participants and study quality evaluation scores.

Author, year Gestational age (weeks) Birthweight (g) E:C samples Experimental group method Control group method Feeding method Outcome indicators Grade
Bin-Nun et al., 2005 (11) 29.8±2.6 1,152±262 72:73 Probiotics mixture 1 Placebo HM (a)(b)(d) A
Lin et al., 2008 (12) N/A 1,028.9±246.0 217:217 Probiotics mixture 2 Placebo HM (c)(d) B
Samanta et al., 2009 (13) 30.12±1.63 1,172±143 91:95 Probiotics mixture 1 Placebo HM (c)(d)(e) B
Braga et al., 2011 (14) 29.5±2.5 1,194.7±206.3 119:112 Probiotics mixture 2 Placebo HM (c)(d) B
Sari et al., 2011 (15) 29.5±2.4 1,231±262 110:111 Lactobacillus sporogenes Placebo HM (c)(d)(f) A
Demirel et al., 2013 (16) 28.0 (range, 17–45) 1,164±261 135:136 Saccharomyces boulardii Placebo HM (c)(d)(e)(f) B
Fernández-Carrocera et al., 2013 (17) 31.2 (range, 26–35.4) 1,090 (range, 580–1,495) 75:75 Probiotics mixture 3 Placebo HM (a)(c)(d)(e) A
Oncel et al., 2014 (18) 28.2±2.4 1,071±274 200:200 Lactobacillus reuteri Placebo HM (a)(c)(d)(e)(f) A
Van Niekerk et al., 2015 (19) 24–34 500–1,250 54:56 Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Placebo HM (a)(d) A
Costeloe et al., 2016 (20) 28 (26.1–29.1) 1,039±312 650:660 Bifidobacterium breve Placebo HM (a)(d) A

multiple-strain probiotics: 1= Bifidobacteria infantis, Streptococcus thermophilus, and Bifidobacteria bifidus; 2= Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus; 3= Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus casei, Lactobacillus plantarum, Bifidobacteruim infantis, and Streptococcus thermophilus. Outcome indicators: (a) overall NEC incidence, (b) NEC severity score, (c) NEC stage ≥2, (d) mortality, (e) length of stay, (f) feeding intolerance. E:C, experimental: control; N/A, not available; HM, human milk; NEC, neonatal necrotizing enterocolitis.