FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / PLoS One / The evaluation of the effect of probiotics on the healing of...
PloS one2020; 15(7); e0236761; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236761

The evaluation of the effect of probiotics on the healing of equine distal limb wounds.

Abstract: The effect of dressings saturated with either a standardized suspension of probiotic bacteria or saline on healing of traumatic distal limb wounds in horses was evaluated for 24 days, and the systemic inflammatory effect was assessed. The wounds were divided in two groups based on the phase of healing: wounds with an incomplete (ICGB) or a complete granulation bed (CGB). The wound area was expressed as percentage of the wound area at day 0 and defined as relative wound area. The mean relative wound area decreased faster in probiotic than saline treated wounds. The difference was most obvious in CGB and increased rapidly from day 0 until day 12 up to 30%, and stabilized around 25% thereafter until the end of the observation period, but it was not statistically significant because of the large variation within the treatment groups. The mean wound area of CGB decreased to 28.4% (range: 6.3 to 49.3) with probiotic and to 51.9% (range: 29.3 to 81.7) with saline treatment at day 24. Additionally, the rate to 50% healing in CGB was 3.4 faster with probiotic compared to saline treatment, whereas in ICGB this was 1.9 faster. Topical probiotics did not increase serum amyloid A and white blood cell counts. Although the mentioned differences were not statistically significant, the clinical relevance of the effect of treatment with probiotics in CGB wounds is clear, supported by the differences in mean wound area in course of time and the time required to reach 50% healing (day 12 for probiotic vs more than day 24 for saline treated wounds). Thus the probiotic treated wounds reached 50% reduction in wound area in half of the time of the saline treated wounds. The topical use of probiotics can be considered as safe as it did not cause a systemic effect.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2020-07-29 PubMed ID: 32726347PubMed Central: PMC7390451DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236761Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article
  • Research Support
  • Non-U.S. Gov't

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The study examines how dressings infused with probiotics can impact healing in horses’ distal limb wounds and reduce inflammation, with wounds treated by probiotics showing a faster rate of recovery than those treated with saline instead.

Research Design and Methods

  • The researchers assessed the impact of probiotics on the healing process of distal limb wounds in horses over 24 days.
  • The wound dressings were either saturated with a standardized suspension of probiotic bacteria or saline.
  • These wounds were separated into two groups: those with incomplete granulation bed (ICGB) and those with a completed granulation bed (CGB).
  • The relative wound area was established by expressing the wound area as a percentage of its area on the initial day (day 0).

Principal Findings

  • On average, the relative wound area decreased faster in wounds treated with probiotics than those treated with saline.
  • The difference was most noticeable in wounds with a complete granulation bed (CGB), with the decrease in wound size reaching up to 30% from day 0 until day 12, before stabilizing around 25% for the rest of the observational period.
  • However, despite this trend, the differences weren’t statistically significant due to substantial variation within the treatment groups.
  • The mean wound area of CGB decreased to 28.4% with probiotic treatment and to 51.9% with saline treatment by the 24th day. Furthermore, the healing rate to 50% in CGB was 3.4 times faster with probiotics compared to the saline treatment, whereas in ICGB, it was 1.9 times faster.

Systemic Inflammatory Response and Safety of Probiotics

  • The study also assessed the systemic inflammatory effect by checking levels of serum amyloid A and white blood cell counts. The use of topical probiotics did not cause an increase in these, demonstrating that probiotics can be considered safe for topical use as they didn’t trigger a systemic response.

Clinical Importance of Probiotics in Healing

  • Although the differences observed weren’t statistically significant, the practical relevance of utilizing probiotics in treating CGB wounds is quite apparent.
  • As the mean wound area over time and the time required to reach 50% healing (day 12 for probiotic vs more than day 24 for saline treated wounds) improved, this suggests that the use of probiotics enabled wounds to reach a 50% reduction in wound area in half of the time it took for the saline treated wounds.

Cite This Article

APA
Wilmink JM, Ladefoged S, Jongbloets A, Vernooij JCM. (2020). The evaluation of the effect of probiotics on the healing of equine distal limb wounds. PLoS One, 15(7), e0236761. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236761

Publication

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
NlmUniqueID: 101285081
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 15
Issue: 7
Pages: e0236761

Researcher Affiliations

Wilmink, Jacintha M
  • Woumarec, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Ladefoged, Søren
  • Højgård Hestehospital A/S, Morud, Denmark.
Jongbloets, Angelique
  • Paardenkliniek West-Brabant, Roosendaal, The Netherlands.
Vernooij, Johannes C M
  • Division Farm Animal Health, Department of Population Health Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Bacteriology
  • Extremities / physiology
  • Female
  • Hematology
  • Horses / blood
  • Horses / microbiology
  • Horses / physiology
  • Male
  • Probiotics / pharmacology
  • Wound Healing / drug effects

Conflict of Interest Statement

The study was funded by Micuri Aps, Denmark. Unfortunately the company does not exist anymore. Micuri has provided the materials required for the study, and payed for the bacteriology and the hematology. Micuri has payed a compensation to the contributing practitioners for their clinical work to treat the wounds of the horses. JW SL AJ have recieved an award for setting up the study and their practical work to perform the study (order of 50%). Analysis of the results and preparation of the manuscript has not been funded. Micuri Aps had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The authors declare that there is no competing interests with Micuri Aps related to employment, consultancy, relationships, patents, products in development, marketed products etc. There is no relation to the PLOS ONE journal, no relation to any legal proceedings, and there is no benefit from publication of the paper. The funding by Micuri Aps does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. There are no restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials.

References

This article includes 40 references
  1. Bjarnsholt T, Kirketerp-Moller K, Jensen PO, Madsen KG, Phipps R, Krogfelt K. Why chronic wounds will not heal: a novel hypothesis. Wound Repair Regen 2008; 16: 2–10.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2007.00283.xpubmed: 18211573google scholar: lookup
  2. Westgate SJ, Percival SL, Knottenbelt DC, Clegg PD, Cochrane CA. Microbiology of equine wounds and evidence of bacterial biofilms. Vet Microbiol 2011; 150: 152–59.
    doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2011.01.003pubmed: 21273008google scholar: lookup
  3. Theoret CL, Olutoye OO, Parnell LK, Hicks J. Equine exuberant granulation tissue and human keloids: a comparative histopathologic study. Vet Surg 2013; 42: 783–89.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2013.12055.xpubmed: 24015864google scholar: lookup
  4. Theoret CL, Wilmink JM. Aberrant wound healing in the horse: naturally occurring conditions reminiscent of those observed in man. Wound Repair Regen 2013; 21: 365–71.
    doi: 10.1111/wrr.12018pubmed: 23441750google scholar: lookup
  5. Wilmink JM, van Herten J, van Weeren PR, Barneveld A. Retrospective study of primary intention healing and sequestrum formation in horses compared to ponies under clinical circumstances. Equine Vet J 2002; 34: 270–73.
    doi: 10.2746/042516402776186047pubmed: 12108745google scholar: lookup
  6. Wilmink JM, Stolk PW, van Weeren PR, Barneveld A. Differences in second-intention wound healing between horses and ponies: macroscopic aspects. Equine Vet J 1999; 31: 53–60.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1999.tb03791.xpubmed: 9952330google scholar: lookup
  7. Sorensen MA, Petersen LJ, Bundgaard L, Toft N, Jacobsen S. Regional disturbances in blood flow and metabolism in equine limb wound healing with formation of exuberant granulation tissue. Wound Repair Regen 2014; 22: 647–53.
    doi: 10.1111/wrr.12207pubmed: 24935817google scholar: lookup
  8. Wilmink JM, van Weeren PR, Stolk PW, Van Mil FN, Barneveld A. Differences in second-intention wound healing between horses and ponies: histological aspects. Equine Vet J 1999; 31: 61–67.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1999.tb03792.xpubmed: 9952331google scholar: lookup
  9. van den Boom R, Wilmink JM, O'Kane S, Wood J, Ferguson MW. Transforming growth factor-beta levels during second- intention healing are related to the different course of wound contraction in horses and ponies. Wound Repair Regen 2002; 10: 188–94.
    doi: 10.1046/j.1524-475x.2002.10608.xpubmed: 12100380google scholar: lookup
  10. Wilmink JM, Veenman JN, van den Boom R, Rutten VP, Niewold TA, Broekhuisen-Davies JM. Differences in polymorphonucleocyte function and local inflammatory response between horses and ponies. Equine Vet J 2003; 35: 561–69.
    doi: 10.2746/042516403775467234pubmed: 14515955google scholar: lookup
  11. Wilmink JM. Differences in wound healing between horses and ponies, Clinical application of the results of research. In: Theoret C, Schumacher J, editors. Equine Wound Management 3rd ed Iowa: Wiley-Blackwell; 2017. pp. 21–27.
  12. . Joint FAO/WHO Working Group Report on Drafting Guidelines for the Evaluation of Probiotics in Food. London, Ontario, Canada; 2002 April 30 and May 1.
  13. Vuotto C, Longo F, Donelli G. Probiotics to counteract biofilm-associated infections: promising and conflicting data. Int J Oral Sci 2014; 6: 189–94.
    doi: 10.1038/ijos.2014.52pmc: PMC5153589pubmed: 25257882google scholar: lookup
  14. Schoster A, Weese JS, Guardabassi L. Probiotic use in horses—what is the evidence for their clinical efficacy?. J Vet Intern Med 2014; 28: 1640–52.
    doi: 10.1111/jvim.12451pmc: PMC4895607pubmed: 25231539google scholar: lookup
  15. Sikorska H, Smoragiewicz W. Role of probiotics in the prevention and treatment of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2013; 42: 475–81.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2013.08.003pubmed: 24071026google scholar: lookup
  16. Valdez JC, Peral MC, Rachid M, Santana M, Perdigón G. Interference of Lactobacillus plantarum with Pseudomonas aeruginosa in vitro and in infected burns: the potential use of probiotics in wound treatment. Clin Microbiol Infect 2005; 11: 472–79.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2005.01142.xpubmed: 15882197google scholar: lookup
  17. Ramos AN, Cabral ME, Noseda D, Bosch A, Yantorno OM, Valdez JC. Antipathogenic properties of Lactobacillus plantarum on Pseudomonas aeruginosa: the potential use of its supernatants in the treatment of infected chronic wounds. Wound Repair Regen 2012; 20: 552–62.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2012.00798.xpubmed: 22642376google scholar: lookup
  18. Varma P, Nisha N, Dinesh KR, Kumar AV, Biswas R. Anti-infective properties of Lactobacillus fermentum against Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol 2011; 20: 137–43.
    doi: 10.1159/000328512pubmed: 21701187google scholar: lookup
  19. Walencka E, Rozalska S, Sadowska B, Rozalska B. The influence of Lactobacillus acidophilus-derived surfactants on staphylococcal adhesion and biofilm formation. Folia Microbiol (Praha) 2008; 53: 61–66.
    pubmed: 18481220
  20. Oelschlaeger TA. Mechanisms of probiotic actions–A review. Int J Med Microbiol 2010; 300: 57–62.
    doi: 10.1016/j.ijmm.2009.08.005pubmed: 19783474google scholar: lookup
  21. Sonal Sekhar M, Unnikrishnan MK, Vijayanarayana K, Rodrigues GS, Mukhopadhyay C. Topical application/formulation of probiotics: will it be a novel treatment approach for diabetic foot ulcer?. Med Hypotheses 2014, 82: 86–88.
    doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2013.11.013pubmed: 24296233google scholar: lookup
  22. Brachkova MI, Marques P, Rocha J, Sepodes B, Duarte MA, Pinto JF. Alginate films containing Lactobacillus plantarum as wound dressing for prevention of burn infection. J Hosp Infect 2011; 79: 375–77.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2011.09.003pubmed: 22000853google scholar: lookup
  23. Huseini HF, Rahimzadeh G, Fazeli MR, Mehrazma M, Salehi M. Evaluation of wound healing activities of kefir products. Burns 2012; 38: 719–23.
    doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2011.12.005pubmed: 22237053google scholar: lookup
  24. Peral MC, Rachid MM, Gobbato NM, Martinez MA, Valdez JC. Interleukin-8 production by polymorphonuclear leukocytes from patients with chronic infected leg ulcers treated with Lactobacillus plantarum. Clin Microbiol Infect 2010; 16: 281–86.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2009.02793.xpubmed: 19519855google scholar: lookup
  25. Peral MC, Martinez MA, Valdez JC. Bacteriotherapy with Lactobacillus plantarum in burns. Int Wound J 2009; 6: 73–81.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2008.00577.xpmc: PMC7951207pubmed: 19291120google scholar: lookup
  26. Jacobsen S, Andersen PH. The acute phase protein serum amyloid A (SAA) as a marker of inflammation in horses. Equine Vet Educ 2007; 19: 38–46.
  27. Jacobsen S, Kjelgaard-Hansen M, Hagbard Petersen H, Jensen AL. Evaluation of a commercially available human serum amyloid A (SAA) turbidometric immunoassay for determination of equine SAA concentrations. Vet J 2006; 172: 315–19.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2005.04.021pubmed: 15950503google scholar: lookup
  28. Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, R Core Team. Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. R package version 2016; 31–127.
  29. Therneau T. A Package for Survival Analysis in S_. 2015; version 2.38.
  30. . Reflect-statement pdf, p. 61. Avaiable from: http://www.reflect-statement.org/docs/vet-med-journal.
  31. R Core Team. A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing; Vienna, Austria; 2016.
  32. Wiegand C, Abel M, Ruth P, Hipler UC. Superabsorbent polymer-containing wound dressings have a beneficial effect on wound healing by reducing PMN elastase concentration and inhibiting microbial growth. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2011; 22: 2583–90.
    doi: 10.1007/s10856-011-4423-3pubmed: 21870081google scholar: lookup
  33. Jacobsen, Nielsen JV, Kjelgaard-Hansen M. Acute phase response to surgery of varying intensity in horses: a preliminary study. Vet Surg 2009; 38: 762–769.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2009.00564.xpubmed: 19674420google scholar: lookup
  34. Nomoto K. Prevention of infections by probiotics. J Biosci Bioeng 2005; 100: 583–92.
    doi: 10.1263/jbb.100.583pubmed: 16473765google scholar: lookup
  35. Reid G. The importance of guidelines in the development and application of probiotics. Curr Pharm Des 2005; 11: 11–16.
    doi: 10.2174/1381612053382395pubmed: 15638748google scholar: lookup
  36. Mayes T, Gottschlich MM, James LE, Allgeier C, Weitz J, Kagan RJ. Clinical safety and efficacy of probiotic administration following burn injury. J Burn Care Res 2015; 36: 92–99.
    doi: 10.1097/BCR.0000000000000139pubmed: 25559730google scholar: lookup
  37. Fazli M, Bjarnsholt T, Kirketerp-Moller K, Jørgensen B, Andersen AS, Krogfelt K. Nonrandom Distribution of Pseudomonas aruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus in Chronic Wounds. J Clin Microbiol 2009; 47: 4084–89.
    doi: 10.1128/JCM.01395-09pmc: PMC2786634pubmed: 19812273google scholar: lookup
  38. Freeman K, Woods E, Welsby S, Percival SL, Cochrane CA. Biofilm evidence and the microbial diversity of horse wounds. Can J Microbiol 2009; 55: 197–202.
    doi: 10.1139/w08-115pubmed: 19295652google scholar: lookup
  39. Jebur M. Therapeutic efficacy of Lactobacillus acidophilus against bacterial isolates from burn wounds. N Am J Med Sci 2010; 2: 586–91.
    doi: 10.4297/najms.2010.2586pmc: PMC3338227pubmed: 22558572google scholar: lookup
  40. Theoret CL, Wilmink JM. Treatment of Exuberant Granulation Tissue. In: Theoret C, Schumacher J, editors. Equine Wound Management 3rd ed Iowa: Wiley-Blackwell; 2017. pp. 369–84.

Citations

This article has been cited 6 times.
  1. Styková E, Valocký I, Kačírová J, Fecskeová LK. Microbiological effect of topically applied Weissella cibaria on equine pastern dermatitis. Front Vet Sci 2024;11:1493756.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2024.1493756pubmed: 39834920google scholar: lookup
  2. Ribeiro G, Carvalho L, Borges J, Prazeres J. The Best Protocol to Treat Equine Skin Wounds by Second Intention Healing: A Scoping Review of the Literature. Animals (Basel) 2024 May 18;14(10).
    doi: 10.3390/ani14101500pubmed: 38791717google scholar: lookup
  3. Afonso AC, Sousa M, Pinto AR, Cotovio M, Simões M, Saavedra MJ. Biofilm Production by Critical Antibiotic-Resistant Pathogens from an Equine Wound. Animals (Basel) 2023 Apr 13;13(8).
    doi: 10.3390/ani13081342pubmed: 37106905google scholar: lookup
  4. Mendonça AA, Pinto-Neto WP, da Paixão GA, Santos DDS, De Morais MA Jr, De Souza RB. Journey of the Probiotic Bacteria: Survival of the Fittest. Microorganisms 2022 Dec 30;11(1).
    doi: 10.3390/microorganisms11010095pubmed: 36677387google scholar: lookup
  5. Srivastava P, Sondak T, Sivashanmugam K, Kim KS. A Review of Immunomodulatory Reprogramming by Probiotics in Combating Chronic and Acute Diabetic Foot Ulcers (DFUs). Pharmaceutics 2022 Nov 10;14(11).
    doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics14112436pubmed: 36365254google scholar: lookup
  6. Helal IE, Al-Abbadi HA, El-Daharawy MH, Ahmed MF. Enhancement of chronic wound healing with maltodextrin/ascorbic acid gel: a clinical evaluation of distal limb wounds in horses. J Anim Sci Technol 2022 Sep;64(5):997-1007.
    doi: 10.5187/jast.2022.e52pubmed: 36287738google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.