Lactobacillus GG vs placebo: No episodes of acute pouchitis
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Lactobacillus GG vs placebo No episodes acute pouchitis · Patients with acute pouchitis The review found no eligible studies for this question. Treatment and prevention of pouchitis after ileal pouch‐anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD001176.PUB4, superseded | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Lactobacillus GG vs placebo No episodes acute pouchitis · Patients with acute pouchitis The review found no eligible studies for this question. Treatment and prevention of pouchitis after ileal pouch‐anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment and prevention of pouchitis after ileal pouch‐anal anastomosis for chronic ulcerative colitis 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.