<scp>VSL</scp>#3<sup>®</sup> probiotic therapy does not reduce portal pressures in patients with decompensated cirrhosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: In patients with decompensated cirrhosis, bacterial translocation can contribute to splanchnic vasodilatation, decreased effective circulating volume, and portal hypertension. The primary objective of this randomized, double blind placebo controlled trial was to evaluate the effect of the probiotic VSL#3(®) on the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). METHODS: Seventeen patients with decompensated cirrhosis and an HVPG of ≥ 10 mmHg were randomized to receive 2 months of VSL#3(®) or an identical placebo. HVPG, endotoxin, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, IL-10, renin, aldosterone, nitric oxide and stool microbiota were measured at baseline and study end. RESULTS: Two of the 17 patients were taken off the trial before completion (one for alcohol abuse and the second for SBP - both in placebo arm). Data were analysed on the remaining 15 patients. The median model for end-stage liver disease score was 12, and 80% of patients had Child Pugh B disease. The treatment arm had a greater decrease in HVPG from baseline to study end than the placebo arm (median change from baseline -11.6% vs +2.8%), although this reduction was not statistically significant in either group. There was a significant reduction in the plasma aldosterone level in the VSL#3(®) group, but no significant changes in the other measured parameters, including the stool microflora analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of our sample size, VSL#3(®) therapy does not appear to have a significant impact on portal pressure reduction in patients with decompensated cirrhosis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".