Microbiome Modulation as a Therapeutic Approach in Chronic Skin Diseases

Abstract

There is a growing quantity of evidence on how skin and gut microbiome composition impacts the course of various dermatological diseases. The strategies involving the modulation of bacterial composition are increasingly in the focus of research attention. The aim of the present review was to analyze the literature available in PubMed (MEDLINE) and EMBASE databases on the topic of microbiome modulation in skin diseases. The effects and possible mechanisms of action of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics in dermatological conditions including atopic dermatitis (AD), psoriasis, chronic ulcers, seborrheic dermatitis, burns and acne were analyzed. Due to the very limited number of studies available regarding the topic of microbiome modulation in all skin diseases except for AD, the authors decided to also include case reports and original studies concerning oral administration and topical application of the pro-, pre- and synbiotics in the final analysis. The evaluated studies mostly reported significant health benefits to the patients or show promising results in animal or ex vivo studies. However, due to a limited amount of research and unambiguous results, the topic of microbiome modulation as a therapeutic approach in skin diseases still warrants further investigation.

1. Introduction

In 1683, Antoni van Leuwenhoek made the first microscopic observation of bacteria colonizing the surface of the human skin [1]. Joshua Lederberg first suggested the term microbiome in 2000, meaning the collective genome of commensal, symbiotic and pathological bacteria, archaea and eukaryote of the human body [2].

The skin microbiome includes bacteria, fungi, viruses, micro-eukaryotes (mites), archaea, and phages [3]. They can be found not only on the surface of the epidermis, but also in sweat, sebaceous glands and associated hair follicles [4]. The composition of microbiome differs among different regions affected by numerous factors including age, gender, genetics, immunity, hormonal balance, sleep routine, stress, metabolic factors, hygiene and skin care routine, chemical or ultraviolet radiation exposure, physical activity, climate, environmental pollution and availability of nutrients [5]. The initial colonization of the skin depends on the delivery mode, with neonates delivered vaginally acquiring the species (spp.) present in the vaginal tract (e.g., Lactobacillus, Prevotella, Sneathia) in contrast to children delivered by Cesarean section, that acquire microbiome associated with the skin (e.g., Staphylococcus, Corynebacterium, Cutibacterium) [6,7]. The skin microbiome of newborns is less complex than for adults [8]. In adults, the longest assessment of the skin microbiome composition lasted for 2 years, indicating that the skin microbiome remains rather stable despite changes in the environment [9]. The most dominant group in the skin microbiome are bacteria [10]. The most dominant species are Staphylococcus epidermidis, Cutibacterium acnes and Corynebacterium, which overall are estimated to constitute 45–80% of the skin microbiome [5]. Considering bacteria, sebaceous and dry areas are dominated by Cutibacterium spp. Moist environments, with a greater humidity level, harbor mostly Staphylococcus and Corynebacterium [11]. Regarding fungi, Malassezia spp. are present on the whole body surface, predominant in oily sites (face, back); however, in the foot site the fungal diversity is greater [11]. The viruses identified on the human skin include Papillomaviridae, Polyomaviridae and Circoviridae families [4]. The dust mites, found in 23–100% of the population, are considered commensals; however, it is known that Demodex mites may be associated with blepharitis and rosacea [3]. The data on the type and role of the phages are limited, yet it was found that they can modulate the skin microbiome [12]. Skin microbiome alterations were found in the background of numerous dermatological diseases, including acne, atopic dermatitis (AD) and psoriasis, among others [13,14].

Similarly to the skin, the gut microbiome starts to shape after the delivery. Depending on dominant genera, three robust clusters of intestinal microbiome, referred to enterotypes, may be distinguished: enterotype 1 with dominant Bacteroides, enterotype 2 with dominant Prevotella and enterotype 3 with dominant Ruminococcus [15]. The interactions between the gut microbiome and the skin are complex and not yet fully elucidated; however, several pathways bringing light to this topic may be found [16]. Gut bacterial dysbiosis may lead to reduced short-chain fatty acid (SCFAs) production, as well as disruption of the gut barrier integrity and increased permeability, that results in bacterial translocation, activation of immune cells to produce pro-inflammatory cytokines and promotes chronic, low-grade systemic inflammation [14].

Probiotics are defined by the World Health Organisation as living microorganisms that confer a health benefit when administered in adequate amounts [17]. Administering probiotics results in the stabilization of the gut bacterial community, restoration of the bacterial microbiota “signature” in the gut, producing bacteriocins, altering microRNA (miRNAs), competing with pathogens for certain nutrients and improving the gut barrier function [18].

Antibiotics have a diverse effects on the skin and gut microbiome’s ecological balance, depending on the antibiotic class, dosage and duration [19]. Antibiotic therapies are essential in the treatment of chronic dermatological diseases including acne and rosacea [20]. They possibly reduce the propotion of pathogenic bacteria and promote the growth of potentially beneficial microorganisms [21]. However, dysbiosis of the healthy gut microbiome’s composition, induced by antibiotics, can cause and aggravate disease [22]. Moreover, antibiotic therapies have a high rate of adverse reactions and their overutilization increases the probability of developing resistance [21].

Prebiotics are substances, such as carbohydrates or fibres, that can promote the growth of beneficial bacteria. They can be defined as selectively fermented ingredients that allow specific changes in the composition as well as in the activity of the gastrointestinal microflora. Similarly to probiotics, they confer benefits upon host health. As prebiotics are typically fibers that cannot be digested by the host, they are metabolized by the gut microbiome in the colon, which results in an abundance of certain bacterial species and metabolites production, including SCFAs [4]. The combination of probiotics and prebiotics, administered simultaneously, is referred to as ‘synbiotics’, where the two agents show synergism [23].

Pre- and probiotics, modifying the gut microbiome, may be used for targeting skin health [24]. In the present paper, it was aimed to review the current knowledge concerning skin diseases, in which the supplementation of pre- or probiotics is beneficial via the modulation of the skin or gut microbiome.

2. Materials and Methods

A search of PubMed (MEDLINE) and EMBASE databases was conducted, using a combination of keywords such as: “microbiome”; “modulation”; “prebiotic”; “probiotic”; “skin”; “skin disease” using MeSH and Emtree methods. The majority of results concerned the following diseases: AD, psoriasis, chronic wounds, SD, burns and acne. A second search in PubMed (MEDLINE) and EMBASE databases was conducted, using a combination of keywords such as: “probiotic” or “prebiotic” and the name of each of the mentioned diseases. The literature review was based on the PRISMA principles (Figure 1). Works in English published until June 2021 were included with inclusion criteria as follows: full text articles available, use of probiotics or prebiotics to treat the skin diseases. The total number of records considered into analysis was 563 on AD, 188 records on psoriasis, 628 records on ulcers, 20 records on SD, 126 records on burns and 165 records on acne. After the duplicates were removed, 470 records on AD, 101 on psoriasis, 78 on ulcers, 17 on SD, 30 on burns and 165 on acne were further analyzed. As a very limited number of studies were available on the topic of microbiome modulation with probiotics and prebiotics supplementation in all skin diseases except for AD, the authors decided to include case reports, original studies on animal or in vitro model in cases of other skin diseases. 113 articles were included in the final analysis concerning the effects of probiotics, prebiotics and synbiotics supplementation in AD, SD, psoriasis, burns, chronic ulcers and acne. We analyzed the number of patients, race, country of origin of the study population, study and control group size, study type, type of intervention and outcomes.

3. Results

Atopic dermatitis. We identified 21 original studies which investigate the influence of probiotic supplementation in pregnant women and newborns with family history of AD or allergic diseases (Table 1). Additionally, 11 studies assessed the prevention of AD with prebiotics (Table 2). 37 original studies present the treatment of AD with probiotics and prebiotics in infants (Table 3), children (Table 4) and adults (Table 5). No published data are available on the use of prebiotics in the treatment of adult patients with AD.

Psoriasis. Three publications concerning the administration of probiotics were found—one case report and two original studies. Four original studies investigating animal models were identified. No studies concerning prebiotics administration in psoriatic patients were found. The results are presented in Table 6.

Chronic ulcers. One case report and two clinical trials were found. Two studies concerning probiotics supplementation in the animal model were also identified; the authors also included two in vitro studies on probiotics application (Table 7). No published data on the topic of prebiotics supplementation in chronic ulcers was found.

Seborrheic dermatitis. Two clinical trials addressing oral administration of probiotics and one concerning topical administration were identified. One of the studies reported SD as a side effect of probiotic administration (Table 8).

Burns. 16 studies reporting the influence of pre- or probiotics on the healing of burns, the permeability of gut barrier in patients suffering from burns or the complications including sepsis were found, including seven original studies and two case reports. Both in clinical trials and in the animal model, the oral and topical administration of probiotics was investigated. One animal study also investigated the effects of local administration with daily sub-eschar injections. A single study on the prebiotics influence on the gut barrier permeability was also reported (Table 9).

Acne. 11 studies on the effects of probiotics and prebiotics on acne were included in the final analysis: seven clinical trials, divided into two groups with oral supplementation or topical application, and four in vitro studies. Studies concerning the use of bacterial strains not considered as probiotics (C. acnes, S. epidermidis) or probiotics modulating gut microbiome during antibiotic therapy were excluded from the analysis. The results are presented in Table 10.

4. Discussion

4.1. Atopic Dermatitis

AD is a common, chronic inflammatory skin disease, affecting almost 3% of adults and up to 10–20% of the child population, with an increasing prevalence. The onset usually occurs during the first year of life. AD is characterized by dry skin, pruritus and recurrent eczematous lesions. The severity of AD may be assessed by SCORAD (scoring atopic dermatitis) severity score [137]. AD is often associated with other atopic diseases: allergic rhinitis and asthma [138]. The skin and gut microbiome in adult AD patients is affected among others by maternal diet during pregnancy, the mode of delivery, antibiotics taken during pregnancy and in infancy, chronic exposure to allergens [139]. It is estimated that in over 90% of cases both lesional and non-lesional skin of the patients is colonised with S. aureus in AD, compared with less than 5% of healthy individuals. Moreover, in the affected areas, the abundance of S. aureus was associated with disease severity [140]. Increase in fungal diversity and the presence of unique anaerobic bacterial species such as Clostridium and Serratia spp. was also found on the skin of AD patients [13].

Prevention of thedevelopment ofatopic dermatitis using probiotics. Eight out of 21 studies reported a decreased occurrence of AD in the probiotics group. Most studies investigated L. rhamnosus GG (LGG). The positive impact of probiotics has been proven by Kalliomaki et al. According to the results, AD is diagnosed in 46 of 132 (35%) children aged two years, with the frequency of AD in the probiotic group (LGG) half that of the placebo group (15/64 [23%] vs. 31/68 [46%]) [25]. Wickens et al. in their study examined the L. rhamnosus HN001 (HN001) and HN019 influence on AD, founding the probiotic group with significantly lower cumulative prevalence of eczema and skin prick test sensitization [29]. Another study by Wickens et al. proved that mother and child intervention with HN001 probiotic supplementation was associated with a reduction in eczema and SCORAD. Note that maternal-only HN001 supplementation did not significantly reduce the prevalence of eczema in the infant by 12 months [43]. In 2006, Rautava et al. examined the use of LGG and Bifidobacterium lactis Bb-12 (Bb-12) in a 12-month follow-up trial. AD developed in 4/32 (13%) of the infants receiving probiotics and 8/40 (20%) of those receiving placebo [26]. Six years later, Rautava et al. confirmed the impact of daily probiotics intake (either the combination of L. rhamnosus LPR and B. longum BL999 (BL999) or the combination of L. Paracasei ST11 (ST11) and BL999), showing the risk of developing AD during the first 24 months of life significantly reduced in infants of mothers receiving probiotics [38]. Schmidt et al. carried out another study involving the supplementation of LGG and Bb-12, resulting in lower incidence of AD (4.2%) in the probiotic versus placebo group (11.5%) [45] Kim et al. proved that in the probiotic group the occurrence of AD was significantly reduced compared to the placebo group at 12 months of age (36.4% vs. 62.9%) [141]. Lau et al. showed that Escherichia coli and Enterococcus faecalis significantly reduced the incidence of AD development in the subgroup of high risk infants. Ten percent (15/154) of infants in the active group developed AD compared to 19% in the placebo group. This was more pronounced in the group of infants with paternal heredity for atopy (11% vs. 32%) [40]. The study of West et al. investigated the use of L. paracasei F-19 and found that the cumulative incidence of eczema at 13 months of age was 9/84 in the probiotic and 19/87 in the placebo groups [32].

However, 13 out of 21 trials showed that the administration of probiotics had no impact on prevalence of AD. Studies by Allen et al., Dotterud et al., Huurre et al. and Plummer et al. showed that a mix of bacterial strains was given and revealed a similar frequency of diagnosed AD both in the study and control groups. They also showed no effect of the use of probiotics in pregnant mother and infants to avoid the development of AD [30,36,41,44]. The study by Niers et al. provided interesting results in which parental-reported eczema during the first three months of life was significantly lower in the intervention group compared with placebo, 6/50 vs. 15/52. After three months, the incidence of AD was similar in both groups [33]. The use of probiotic (L. reuteri) in the group of pregnant women and infants was evaluated by Abrahamsson et al. Despite the cumulative incidence of AD was similar in the L. reuteri and the placebo groups (36% vs. 34%), IgE-associated eczema was less common in the L. reuteri group, although the difference was only statistically significant during the second year of life (8% vs. 20%) [27]. Conclusions from the studies by Boyle et al., Cabana et al., Kopp et al. and Ou et al. evaluating the effect of LGG on pregnant mothers showed that there was no difference between the probiotic group and placebo in the appearance of AD among the infants [31,37,39,42]. Soh et al. examined the incidence of AD in infants receiving probiotics (B. longi and L. rhamnosus). The incidence of eczema in the probiotic group was similar to that in the placebo group (22% vs. 25%). The median SCORAD at 12 months was 17.10 in the probiotic group and 11.60 in the placebo group [34]. Investigating the effects of L. acidophilus in their study, Taylor et al. showed no difference in the probiotic (n = 23/89; 25.8%) and placebo (n = 20/88; 22.7%) groups [28].

Prebiotics in the prevention of atopic dermatitis. The number of studies on prebiotics in the prevention of AD is limited and they present inconsistent results. Studies investigated only a few prebiotic compounds: combination of galacto-oligosaccharide (GOS) and fructo-oligosahccaride (FOS), acidic oligosaccharides, polydextrose (PDX), different content of lactose, oligofructose plus inulin. Among the nine studies included in this review, five have shown the positive effect of prebiotics in the prevention of the development of eczema. The rest of the studies showed no significant differences in group of infants fed with or without prebiotics.

Positive effects of the administration of prebiotics has been shown by Ziegler et al., who investigated the administration of a GOS and PDX mix and found a statistical difference in the occurrence of eczema (prebiotics vs. control: 18 vs. 7%) [47]. The same combination was used by Pontes et al. in their study, who reported a lower number of allergic diseases including AD in the analyzed group receiving prebiotics [53]. Three trials investigating the relationship between GOS supplementation and preventing eczema shown a decreased risk of developing AD [46,48,49]. However, Grüber et al. found that a formula containing a mixture of neutral oligosaccharides can be also effective in prevention of AD [50]. Wopereis et al. also presented a beneficial impact in the prevention of AD and modulation of gut microbiota by using a partially hydrolyzed formula containing short-chain GOS and long-chain FOS and pectin-derived acidic oligosaccharides [56]. No differences between prebiotic groups and control groups have been found in four studies. Two of them investigated a mix of FOS and GOS [51,52]. Ranucci et al. used a mixture of GOS and PDX in their trial. There were no significant differences in the cumulative incidence, intensity and duration of AD among the investigated groups of patients [55]. A study by Boyle et al. on prebiotic containing FOS has shown that prebiotics did not prevent AD in high-risk infants during the first 12 months of life [54].

Role of probiotics and prebioticsin AD treatment. 20 of 27 studies on probiotics revealed improving SCORAD in AD patients compared to placebo. One of the first studies on probiotic treatment in AD, that found using probiotics may have positive impact on the course of AD, was the study by Isolauri et al. The aim of their study was to evaluate the effects of probiotics use with Bb-12 or LGG on infants with AD. The results showed that by using probiotics, the skin condition improves. SCORAD decreased in the Bb-12 group to 0, and in the LGG group to 1 versus the SCORAD of 13.4 in the placebo group [58]. Drago et al. evaluated the influence of S. thermophilus ST10 and tara gum on the SCORAD score. The score decreased significantly in the probiotic group after one month and the index was significantly lower in the probiotic group than in the placebo group [92]. Ivakhnenko et al. evaluated both the use of Bb-12 and Streptococcus thermophilus for 4 weeks. The results showed significant improvement of SCORAD in the probiotic group compared to blacebo [73]. Wu et al. proofed that the SCORAD index declined from baseline after two months in the LGG group [76]. Brouwer, Folster-Holst and Kirjavainen showed similar effects of this LGG bacteria in AD patients [59,63,64]. Studies which resulted in a significant decrease in the SCORAD index in AD patients by using probiotics containing single strains or combined bacterial strains, including L. salivarus LS01, were also those conducted by Drago et al. [89] and Iemoli et al., [90] L. acidofilus DDS-1—by Gerasimov et al. [80], L. plantarum—by Han et al. [82], L. fermentum—by Weston et al. [61] and L. sakei—by Woo et al. [81] Yang et al. randomly assigned their patients to the probiotic-receiving groups (L. casei, L. rhamnosus, L. plantarum, and B. lactis) or placebo groups for six weeks. The result of their trial was a significant clinical improvement in the skin condition among the probiotic groups [85]. Two of the studies also proved a positive impact on the SCORAD score by using probiotics with B. breve. Taniuchi et al. and Yoshida et al. showed a significant improvement in skin conditions during the study in the probiotic group [62,88]. Three studies assessing the impact of using bacteria mix in probiotic groups revealed a significant improvement in SCORAD scores [84,86,87].

Seven out of 27 studies in children showed no significant differences in SCORAD scores between the probiotic and placebo groups after treatment. Lin et al. proved that the SCORAD index was not significantly reduced in the B. bifidum group versus controls [74]. Grüber et al. suggested that AD improved after four weeks of supplementation (LGG vs. placebo); however, the difference was not significant [65]. Similar results were obtained by Viljanen et al.: the SCORAD score decreased by 65%, but with no statistically significant differences between treatment groups [60]. Sistek et al. evaluated the role of L. rhamnosus and B. lactic. Their findings stated that there is no significant difference between probiotic and placebo groups [78]. Rosenfeldt et al. examined probiotic Lactobacillus strains (lyophilized L. rhamnosus 19070-2 and L. reuteri DSM 122460) in combination for six weeks in 1- to 13-year-old children with AD. The total SCORAD index in this trial did not change significantly [77]. The results of the study by Gøbel et al. study on L. acidophilus and B. lactis Bi-07 (Bi-07) were that there was no benefit for the probiotics on the severity of AD. However, a post hoc analysis showed a significant reduction in severity of AD in the Bi-07 group and possible positive effects of this probiotic strain could be of further interest [68]. Gore et al. in their trial compared the effects of using B. lactis and L. paracasei. No significant differences were observed between the groups after 12-week treatment-period [71].

Five out of 36 studies did not estimate the SCORAD score, but evaluated other factors, such as puritus. Matsumo et al. in their study found that Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis LKM512 may reduce pruritus by increasing expression of metabolite kynurenic acid [91]. The results obtained by Majama et al. suggest that probiotic bacteria may improve endogenous barrier mechanisms in patients with AD and those with food allergies by decreasing intestinal inflammation and may be useful in AD treatment [57]. Studies by Flinterman et al. [66], as well as by Guo et al., suggested that in vitro IgE production is decreased in the probiotic group compared to placebo [75]. Nermes et al. found that the levels of IgA and IgM-sectreting cells decreased significantly in the probiotic group compared to placebo. The baseline-adjusted ratios for treated to untreated patients after one month were 0.59 for IgA- and 0.53 for IgM-secreting cells [69].

Synbiotics. Five publications on the use of synbiotics were found; however, only one of them by Farid et al. reported a significant reduction of the SCORAD score [70]. Passeron et al. compared the effects of probiotics (L. rhamnosus Lcr35) and synbiotics in children over two years old. The study showed no statistical differences regarding SCORAD scores between the two groups [79]. Shafiei et al. showed that there is no significant difference in the mean decrease of total SCORAD between placebo (22.3) and synbiotic groups (24.2) [72]. A significantly greater SCORAD score improvement was found in the symbiotic group of infants with IgE-associated AD by van der Aa et al. [67] Wu et al. also found that a combination of L. salivarius and FOS resulted in lower SCORAD in a comparison with the control [83].

The role of microbiome composition in allergic diseases is well-known, with lower biodiversity found as a factor inducing their development. Modulating the microbiome with probiotics balances the gut microflora, protects the function of intestinal barrier and lowers the level of pro-inflammatory cytokines produced. Probiotics also influence Toll-like receptors, which play an important role in T-cell differentiation and the development of allergic reactions. As skin colonization with S. aureus plays an important role in AD, a promising new perspective of displacing it with more desirable species is also considered [93].

4.2. Psoriasis

Psoriasis is a common inflammatory disease that affects around 2–3% of the population [142]. It manifests with papulosquamous skin lesions with variable distribution and severity [143]. The pathogenesis of the disease is not yet fully elucidated. However, it is known that genetic, immunological and environmental factors may act as triggering factors, making the keratinocytes start secreting pro-inflammatory cytokines [14]. In the skin lesions, increased abundance of Streptococcus spp., Corynebacterium spp., Cutibacterium spp., Staphylococcus spp., Finegoldia spp. and Neisseria spp. can be found. The biodiversity of microbiota is generally decreased in moderate-to-severe psoriatic patients in contrary to mild psoriatic patients [5].

Based on the reported alterations in gut microbiome, attempts were made to use probiotics and prebiotics in the treatment of psoriasis. Two original studies, one case report and four mice studies were published. In the case report described by Vijayashankar and Raghunath, a supplementation with L. sporogenes for 15 days allieviated the symptoms accompanying the sudden onset of generalised pustular psoriasis in a 47-year-old female [94]. Groeger et al. demonstrated a significant decrease in serum CRP, TNF-α levels in psoriatic patients administered with B. infantis 35264 for 8 weeks [95]. In the study by Navarro-Lopez et al., supplementation with B. longum CECT 7347, B. lactis CECT 8145 and L. rhamnosus CECT 8361 for 12 weeks resulted in a significant reduction in PASI scores [96]. In three out of four mice studies, the probiotics were administered orally, while in one study it was administered topically. In all studies, the psoriasis-like skin inflammation was induced by topical appliaction of imiquimod. Chen et al. found that in administering L. pentosus GMNL-77, both for five or seven days, causes a reduction in erythaematous scaling lesions, decreases TNF-α, IL-6, IL-23, IL-17A/F and IL-22 levels in the skin, decreases spleen weight and reduces the number of IL-17- and IL-22-producing CD4+ T cells in the spleen [97]. In the study by Lu et al., seven different groups of six mice each were given different strains of probiotics. B. adolescentis CCFM667, B. breve CCFM1078, Lacticaseibacillus paracasei CCFM1074, and Limosilactobacillus reuteri CCFM1132 ameliorated psoriasis-like pathological characteristics and suppressed the release of IL-23/T helper cell 17 (Th17) axis-related inflammatory cytokines. On the contrary, B. animalis CCFM1148, L. paracasei CCFM1147 and L. reuteri CCFM1040 neither alleviated the pathological characteristics nor reduced the levels of inflammatory cytokines [99]. Ogawa et al. showed that administering Leuconostoc mesenteroides NTM048 to imiquimod-induced mice suppressed erythema, scaling, upregulated IL-17 production, increased the levels of plasma deoxycholic acid and altered the faecal microbiota composition. Changes in the gut microbiome were indicated by the increased abundance of Akkermansia and a decreased abundance of Staphylococcus and Streptococcus [100]. The only study concerning a topical application of probiotics was conducted by Rather et al. Application of ethanol extract (SEL001) isolated from L. sakei proBio-65 resulted in an inhibition of the imiquimod-induced changes in the skin, as well as decreased IL-19, IL-17A and IL-23 levels [98]. It was shown that the gut microbiome plays an important role in the pathogenesis of psoriasis—patients suffering from this disease present with an increased amount of Bacteroidetes and decreased levels of Firmicutes, Proteobacteria and Actinobacteria, probably altering the intestinal barrier integrity, T-cell response and population-type balance, chemotaxis along with carbohydrate, cobalamin, and iron metabolism [144].

4.3. Chronic Ulcers

The use of probiotics as a novel treatment for diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) was first published in 2014. It was suggested that the application of probiotic agents would enable the healing of diabetic ulcers and would prevent diabetic foot infections by activating Toll-like receptors and producing β-defensins, which stimulate skin immune functions [145]. Mohseni et al. investigated the advantages of probiotics in patients with DFU. After the 12-week intervention of probiotic supplementation (L. acidophilus, L. casei, L. fermentum, B. bifidum), it had beneficial effects on the DFU size. It also decreased the serum total cholesterol and CRP and increased plasma nitric oxide (NO) and total plazma antioxidant capacity [102].

Most research was carried out using in vitro models, e.g., the effectiveness of a probiotic based on L. rhamnosus and L. paracasei strains in a 1:1 ratio against microorganisms previously isolated from chronic ulcerative lesions. Following the administration of probiotics, the growth of bacteria, compared to the control, was lower in the case of such bacteria as P. aeruginosa, C. striatum, A. baumanii, S. aureus, P. mirabilis in 75%, in the case of Candida parapsilosis in 93.75%, while in the case of E. faecalis 18.75%, and 50% for the mixed flora of the mentioned pathogens. The ability to co-aggregate all pathogens that could prevent adhesion and invasion was also shown [108]. Kusumaningsih et al. investigated the differences in the number of fibroblast cells and blood vessels after the administration of the probiotic L. casei shirota topically and systemically during the onset of the healing of traumatic ulcers in Wistar rats. The number of fibroblasts and new blood vessels were significantly higher in the two intervention groups in a comparison with the control group [106]. A further study investigated wounded New Zealand rabbits infected with S. aureus and treated with L. fermentum, which secrets gaseous NO. The day after the procedure, treatment with the patch with a probiotic agent started and lasted for 21 or 20 days. Morphometric analysis of the ulcer healing revealed that it was significantly accelerated with this treatment method in both infected and uninfected ischemic wounds [104]. Stefia et al. compared the effects of two different strains of Faecalibacterium prausnitzii (SPA and SPAH) for immune cell activity and wound healing in mice. They found that the presence of these strains in the gut exhibited significantly higher patterns of reepithelialization compared to controls by inhibiting NF-kβ activation. It resulted in decreased wound proinflammatory cytokine expression and induced myofibroblast and collagen transitions [105]. In another model, L. reuteri was transformed with a plasmid containing the genetic material of the C-X-C Motif Chemokine Ligand 12 chemokine involved in accelerated wound healing. Additionally, the lactic acid produced by the probiotic bacterium lowered the pH and increased the bioavailability of the chemokine. This strain was applied to wounds in mice, accelerating ulcer healing, epithelialization, and wound closure [107].

The most relevant original work was published in 2010. L. plantarum was used in the treatment of chronic leg ulcers. The probiotic was applied to ulcers in 14 patients with diabetes and 20 non-diabetic patients. After 30 days of follow-up, 90% of the extent of ulceration had resolved in 43% of diabetic patients and 50% of non-diabetic patients. A decrease in CFU of S. aureus, S. epidermidis and P. aeruginosa was also noted. It was found that probiotics disrupt biofilm, regulate IL-8 levels and modulate the immune system [101]. In addition, Venosi et al. reported a case of an old woman who was successfully treated with a topical administration of probiotics for an ischemic and infected (K. pneumoniae, E. faecalis and P. mirabilis) chronic wound. The patient received a mixture of probiotics (L. plantarum, L. acidophilus and S. thermophiles) three times/week [103].

4.4. Seborrheic Dermatitis

Seborrheic dermatitis (SD) characterized by erythematous, scaling plaques on the the face, chest and scalp [146,147]. It is assumed that the underlying cause of the disease is the excessive activity of sebaceous glands and concomitant infection with Malassezia spp. [146]. Research indicates an increased number of Malassezia strains in the seborrheic area and a satisfactory therapeutic effect of antifungal formulas [147]. Currently, it seems that SD is the result of the skin’s response to free fatty acids produced by M. furfur, which elicit an inflammatory response from keratinocytes [148,149]. M. furfur also possesses the ability to produce metabolites, which stimulate the aryl hydrocarbon receptor and thus may modulate the function of antigen-presenting cells [150].

There are limited data on the effects of probiotics and the modulation of the cutaneous microbiome on the course of SD. The use of superficial Vitreoscilla filiformis preparation in a double-blind study involving 60 patients with SD resulted in a reduction of itching, erythema and scaling. At the cellular and subcellular level, the lysate of these bacteria resulted in an increase in the activity of IL-10 produced by dendritic cells of the skin and an increase in the activity of regulatory T lymphocytes [109]. Another study involving the oral administration of ST11 demonstrated a significant reduction in symptoms, which at the subcellular level was also accompanied by a shift in immune activity consisting, as before, in an increase in IL-10 production [110]. These examples confirm the possible benefits of using both forms of probiotics in the group of patients with SD.

4.5. Burns

The analysis of studies conducted both in animal models and in clinical trials, mostly showed at aleast partial positive effect of the use of probiotics on the healing of infected wounds by inhibiting microbiome growth, microfilm formation and interbacterial communication [151].

Among the various used bacterial strains, the most evidence exists for L. plantarum. Peral et al. established the effectiveness of L. plantarum probiotic treatment with a topical application in human patients. L. plantarum would compete with bacterial pathogens and would be able to promote tissue repair [111]. El-Ghazzey et al. studied the effect of L. fermentum and L. delbruekii treatment in pediatric post-burn patients. They conclude that probiotic administration is safe to use and improves wound healing [115]. In a case report, oral application of L. casei resulted in the appearance of multi-drug sensitive P. aeruginosa instead of an extremely drug-resistant strain [113]. Perdanakusuma et al. demonstrated that B. infantis 35624 single-strain probiotics were more effective compared to Lactobacillus reuteri protectis in altering intestinal immunity [116].

Valdez et al. has been shown in adult inbred BALB/c mice that L. plantarum and/or its by-products could be a potential therapeutic agent for P. aeruginosa burn infections [120]. Brachkova et al. found that the application of calcium alginate films containing L. plantarum reduced P. aeruginosa in a rat model of burns [121]. Argenta et al. proved in mice that probiotic therapy (L. plantarum) suppressed the induction of TNF-α, IL-6 and IL-10 in liver and inhibited the accumulation of the pathogen in remote organs [122]. Satish et al. L. plantarum as a therapeutic agent alleivates burn wound infection and scaring after burn injury in rabbits [123]. Sürmeli et al. demonstrated that L. plantarum has a protective role in non-infected burn wounds against meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Additionally, the therapeutic effect of L. plantarum was not shown in MRSA infection [124]. Herek et al. investigated that the Saccharomyces boulardii could effectively decrease the incidence of antibiotic-induced bacterial translocation in burned rats [118].

Khan et al. demonstrated the importance of the method of probiotic application in a thermal burn mouse model. The use of the bioskeleton compared to traditional forms of probiotic application resulted in acceleration of epithelialization, collagen production and formation of hair follicles, as well as an inhibiton on the growth of pathogenic bacteria, reducing infection and accelerating wound healing [125]. As a result of burns due to systemic stress, the intestinal barrier is significantly impaired, resulting in inflammation and oxidative stress, leading to the destruction of the intestinal barrier and abnormal intestinal function. The studies on the animal model of burns show that the application of glutamine and probiotics reduced the apoptosis of the intestinal epithelial cells [119].

Fleming et al. performed a retrospective study in connection with preventing potential antibiotic-associated C. difficile colitis by giving probiotics to burned patients in a critical condition. Otherwise, they found no significant difference in C. difficile infection between the control group and the intervention group [117]. Olguin et al. proposed that the regular intake of prebiotics might help to increase the gastrointestinal permeability in burn patients. Following the application of oligofructose (OF), they found no difference between the control and OF groups [126].

Due to the damaged intestinal barrier and the impaired immune system function caused by burns, there is a potential risk that probiotic bacteria may translocate and ultimately result in infection. Mayes et al. demonstrated the efficacy and safety of probiotics in the pediatric population hospitalized due to skin burns [114]. However, there are known cases of severe infections and probiotic-induced sepsis in critically ill people [112].

4.6. Acne

Acne is a chronic skin disease, affecting the pilosebaceous units, with multifactorial pathogenesis including hormonal influence, the immunological state of the host, diet, deregulation of insulin-like growth factor, excessive sebum production and FoxO1 deficiency [152,153]. Considering the pathogenesis of acne, Cutibacterium acnes has been implicated as an important pathogenic factor. Fitz-Gibbon et al. compared the Cutibacterium strains in patients suffering from acne and healthy individuals, finding remarkable differences [154]. More and more evidence suggests that dysbiosis on the phylotype/strain level leading to a diversity loss is also a major factor in the pathogenesis of acne [155]. The role of the gut microbiome in acne is also raised, as a study conducted in 2018 showed that patients with acne present with lower gut microbiota diversity (abundance of Firmicutes, Clostridium, Clostridiales, Lachnospiraceae, Ruminococcaceae increased Bacteroides levels) [156].

A limited number of studies concerning probiotics and prebiotics use in acne is available. Yet, it is known that the beneficial components of the microflora may ameliorate skin lesions via the suppression of the Treg cell population. In addition, the suppression of B and Th cells due to the modulation of inflammatory cytokine production along with increasing IgA and butyrate secretion may also have an important effect [144]. A clinical trial investigating oral supplementation of L. rhamnosus SP1 (LSP1) had been reported to bring health benefits to the patients such as LSP1 normalized skin expression of genes involved in insulin signalling and an improvement in the appearance of adult acne [127]. However, a mix of B. lactis W51, B. lactis W52, L. acidophilus W55, L. casei W56, L. salivarius W57, and L. lactis W58 was reported to be a trigger for elevated IL-10 serum levels [129]. The results concerning oral prebiotics supplementation remain more consistent, as both lactoferrin as well as GOS and FOS were associated with positive effects [35,128]. Topical application of probiotic-enriched formulas also seem to have a promise: all of the analyzed studies involving the use of E. faecalis SL-5 [130], Nitrosomonas eutropha [131] or L. acidophilus showed improvement in the skin condition. L. acidophilus was also reported to decrease the population of C. acnes [132]. These findings were also confirmed in in vitro studies: Al-Ghazzewi et al. showed that probiotic bacteria and konjac glucomannan hydrolysates inhibit C. acnes growth [133]. Similar effects were reported by Kang et al., who investigated the properties of L. reuteri on the proliferation of C. acnes and S. epidermidis [134]. Bifidobacterium spp. [135]. as well as two S. salivarius strains and one L. plantarum strain, were also reported to show antimicrobal activity in in vitro studies against C. acnes and other pathogens [136].

4.7. Limitations

The present review focuses on a subject that is relatively new and is still not investigated in full detail. One of the major limitations is the small number of publications reporting clinical studies, especially multi-center, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trials. The number of patients in the presented studies were usually low and many studies involved animal models, which cannot be extrapolated to humans. Since the exact pattern composition of a “healthy microbiome” is impossible to establish, there are no objective measures to investigate a universal model. The bacteria used in different studies presented various genera and properties; moreover, they were derived from different sources, often with no exact information on the method of production, storage and other properties. Moreover, the skin diseases presented in the paper were chosen based on their duration and the number of studies available; however, single studies show that the microbiome modulation, e.g., via a fecal microbiota transplant, may be also effective in the treatment of other dermatological conditions, for example in alopecia areata [157].

5. Conclusions

It can be stated that the microbiome plays an important role in dermatological diseases, at the same time as being an attractive target of therapeutic interaction. This may contribute to the promotion of beneficial (from the point of view of inflammation) activation of the immune system, a reduction of the inflammatory state and, above all, could constitute a physical barrier to the colonization of the skin by pathogenic bacteria. The perspective of treating skin diseases with microbiome modulation via oral and topical probiotics, prebiotics or synbiotics are becoming a part of reality.

There is a growing number of studies into the beneficial effects of probiotics in patients with atopic diseases. It is estimated that the oral application of probiotics or prebiotics during delivery or in the first months of life could delay or alleviate the appearance of AD in infants. From another point of view, probiotics could have the potential to reduce the SCORAD index as a treatment method. On the basis of the available evidence, a recommendation on probiotic intake in order to avoid AD cannot be currently made. Administering probiotics may influence the composition of the gut microbiome, which is more and more often considered to be a factor in the development of psoriasis. The suspected efficacy of probiotics in alleviating the course of psoriasis may be connected to lowering the levels of plasma pro-inflammatory cytokines. Since the data and the amount of research on this topic are limited, it still requires new, randomized, placebo-controlled trials, which would gain an insight into the pathogenesis and novel strategies of psoriasis treatment. There are very limited data available at the moment in the context of chronic ulcers. The positive effects of probiotics were shown mainly in studies focusing on ulcers resulting from diabetes complications. Probiotics may prevent or reduce the infection of burned wounds. Most research has focused on the L. plantarum and has showed at least a partial positive effect of the use of probiotics on the healing of infected wounds by inhibiting pathogen growth, microfilm formation and interbacterial communication. Concerning SD and acne, the very limited available data on probiotic administration have showed inconsistent results.

The studies have shown that probiotics and prebiotics both administered orally or applied topically may have a positive influence on the course of skin diseases. Despite the continuous increase in promising data on the effectiveness of the use of probiotics and prebiotics, further clinical trials are needed to assess the efficacy and long-term safety profile of probiotics and prebiotics in the treatment of patients with dermatological diseases.

Competing interests

Conflicts of InterestThe authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

1. Pillsbury D.M., Shelley W.B.. Dermatology. Annu. Rev. Med.. 1954 doi:10.1146/annurev.me.05.020154.002051 PubMed
2. Hooper L.V., Gordon J.I.. Commensal host-bacterial relationships in the gut. Science. 2001 doi:10.1126/science.1058709 PubMed
3. Patra V., Byrne S.N., Wolf P.. The Skin Microbiome: Is It Affected by UV-induced Immune Suppression?. Front. Microbiol.. 2016 doi:10.3389/fmicb.2016.01235 PubMed
4. Byrd A.L., Belkaid Y., Segre J.A.. The human skin microbiome. Nat. Rev. Microbiol.. 2018 doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2017.157 PubMed
5. Skowron K., Bauza-Kaszewska J., Kraszewska Z., Wiktorczyk-Kapischke N., Grudlewska-Buda K., Kwiecinska-Pirog J. et al. Human Skin Microbiome: Impact of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Factors on Skin Microbiota. Microorganisms. 2021 doi:10.3390/microorganisms9030543 PubMed
6. Mueller N.T., Bakacs E., Combellick J., Grigoryan Z., Dominguez-Bello M.G.. The infant microbiome development: Mom matters. Trends Mol. Med.. 2015 doi:10.1016/j.molmed.2014.12.002 PubMed
7. Dominguez-Bello M.G., Costello E.K., Contreras M., Magris M., Hidalgo G., Fierer N. et al. Delivery mode shapes the acquisition and structure of the initial microbiota across multiple body habitats in newborns. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2010 doi:10.1073/pnas.1002601107 PubMed
8. Grice E.A., Kong H.H., Conlan S., Deming C.B., Davis J., Young A.C. et al. Topographical and temporal diversity of the human skin microbiome. Science. 2009 doi:10.1126/science.1171700 PubMed
9. Oh J., Byrd A.L., Park M., Program N.C.S., Kong H.H., Segre J.A.. Temporal Stability of the Human Skin Microbiome. Cell. 2016 doi:10.1016/j.cell.2016.04.008 PubMed
10. Buerger S.. The Skin and Oral Microbiome: An Examination of Overlap and Potential Interactions between Microbiome Communities. Skin Microbiome Handbook: From Basic Research to Product Development. 2020
11. Findley K., Oh J., Yang J., Conlan S., Deming C., Meyer J.A. et al. Topographic diversity of fungal and bacterial communities in human skin. Nature. 2013 doi:10.1038/nature12171 PubMed
12. Verbanic S., Kim C.Y., Deacon J.M., Chen I.A.. Improved single-swab sample preparation for recovering bacterial and phage DNA from human skin and wound microbiomes. BMC Microbiol.. 2019 doi:10.1186/s12866-019-1586-4 PubMed
13. Weyrich L.S., Dixit S., Farrer A.G., Cooper A.J., Cooper A.J.. The skin microbiome: Associations between altered microbial communities and disease. Australas. J. Dermatol.. 2015 doi:10.1111/ajd.12253 PubMed
14. Polak K., Bergler-Czop B., Szczepanek M., Wojciechowska K., Fratczak A., Kiss N.. Psoriasis and Gut Microbiome-Current State of Art. Int. J. Mol. Sci.. 2021 doi:10.3390/ijms22094529 PubMed
15. Arumugam M., Raes J., Pelletier E., Le Paslier D., Yamada T., Mende D.R. et al. Enterotypes of the human gut microbiome. Nature. 2011 doi:10.1038/nature09944 PubMed
16. LeBlanc J.G., Milani C., de Giori G.S., Sesma F., van Sinderen D., Ventura M.. Bacteria as vitamin suppliers to their host: A gut microbiota perspective. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol.. 2013 doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2012.08.005 PubMed
17. Bosman E.S., Albert A.Y., Lui H., Dutz J.P., Vallance B.A.. Skin Exposure to Narrow Band Ultraviolet (UVB) Light Modulates the Human Intestinal Microbiome. Front. Microbiol.. 2019 doi:10.3389/fmicb.2019.02410 PubMed
18. Zhao Y., Zeng Y., Zeng D., Wang H., Zhou M., Sun N. et al. Probiotics and MicroRNA: Their Roles in the Host-Microbe Interactions. Front. Microbiol.. 2020 doi:10.3389/fmicb.2020.604462 PubMed
19. Mu C., Zhu W.. Antibiotic effects on gut microbiota, metabolism, and beyond. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.. 2019 doi:10.1007/s00253-019-10165-x PubMed
20. O’Sullivan J.N., Rea M.C., Hill C., Ross R.P.. Protecting the outside: Biological tools to manipulate the skin microbiota. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol.. 2020 doi:10.1093/femsec/fiaa085 PubMed
21. Ribeiro C.F.A., Silveira G., Candido E.S., Cardoso M.H., Espinola Carvalho C.M., Franco O.L.. Effects of Antibiotic Treatment on Gut Microbiota and How to Overcome Its Negative Impacts on Human Health. ACS Infect. Dis.. 2020 doi:10.1021/acsinfecdis.0c00036 PubMed
22. Schwartz D.J., Langdon A.E., Dantas G.. Understanding the impact of antibiotic perturbation on the human microbiome. Genome Med.. 2020 doi:10.1186/s13073-020-00782-x PubMed
23. Frei R., Akdis M., O’Mahony L.. Prebiotics, probiotics, synbiotics, and the immune system: Experimental data and clinical evidence. Curr. Opin. Gastroenterol.. 2015 doi:10.1097/MOG.0000000000000151 PubMed
24. Chapat L., Chemin K., Dubois B., Bourdet-Sicard R., Kaiserlian D.. Lactobacillus casei reduces CD8+ T cell-mediated skin inflammation. Eur. J. Immunol.. 2004 doi:10.1002/eji.200425139 PubMed
25. Kalliomaki M., Salminen S., Poussa T., Isolauri E.. Probiotics during the first 7 years of life: A cumulative risk reduction of eczema in a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 2007 doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2006.12.608 PubMed
26. Rautava S., Arvilommi H., Isolauri E.. Specific probiotics in enhancing maturation of IgA responses in formula-fed infants. Pediatr. Res.. 2006 doi:10.1203/01.pdr.0000228317.72933.db PubMed
27. Abrahamsson T.R., Jakobsson T., Bottcher M.F., Fredrikson M., Jenmalm M.C., Bjorksten B. et al. Probiotics in prevention of IgE-associated eczema: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 2007 doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2007.01.007 PubMed
28. Taylor A.L., Dunstan J.A., Prescott S.L.. Probiotic supplementation for the first 6 months of life fails to reduce the risk of atopic dermatitis and increases the risk of allergen sensitization in high-risk children: A randomized controlled trial. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 2007 doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2006.08.036 PubMed
29. Wickens K., Black P.N., Stanley T.V., Mitchell E., Fitzharris P., Tannock G.W. et al. A differential effect of 2 probiotics in the prevention of eczema and atopy: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 2008 doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2008.07.011 PubMed
30. Huurre A., Laitinen K., Rautava S., Korkeamaki M., Isolauri E.. Impact of maternal atopy and probiotic supplementation during pregnancy on infant sensitization: A double-blind placebo-controlled study. Clin. Exp. Allergy. 2008 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2008.03008.x PubMed
31. Kopp M.V., Hennemuth I., Heinzmann A., Urbanek R.. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of probiotics for primary prevention: No clinical effects of Lactobacillus GG supplementation. Pediatrics. 2008 doi:10.1542/peds.2007-1492 PubMed
32. West C.E., Hammarstrom M.L., Hernell O.. Probiotics during weaning reduce the incidence of eczema. Pediatr. Allergy Immunol.. 2009 doi:10.1111/j.1399-3038.2009.00745.x PubMed
33. Niers L., Martin R., Rijkers G., Sengers F., Timmerman H., van Uden N. et al. The effects of selected probiotic strains on the development of eczema (the PandA study). Allergy. 2009 doi:10.1111/j.1398-9995.2009.02021.x PubMed
34. Soh S.E., Aw M., Gerez I., Chong Y.S., Rauff M., Ng Y.P. et al. Probiotic supplementation in the first 6 months of life in at risk Asian infants--effects on eczema and atopic sensitization at the age of 1 year. Clin. Exp. Allergy. 2009 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2008.03133.x PubMed
35. Kim J., Ko Y., Park Y.K., Kim N.I., Ha W.K., Cho Y.. Dietary effect of lactoferrin-enriched fermented milk on skin surface lipid and clinical improvement of acne vulgaris. Nutrition. 2010 doi:10.1016/j.nut.2010.05.011 PubMed
36. Dotterud C.K., Storro O., Johnsen R., Oien T.. Probiotics in pregnant women to prevent allergic disease: A randomized, double-blind trial. Br. J. Dermatol.. 2010 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2010.09889.x PubMed
37. Boyle R.J., Ismail I.H., Kivivuori S., Licciardi P.V., Robins-Browne R.M., Mah L.J. et al. Lactobacillus GG treatment during pregnancy for the prevention of eczema: A randomized controlled trial. Allergy. 2011 doi:10.1111/j.1398-9995.2010.02507.x PubMed
38. Rautava S., Kainonen E., Salminen S., Isolauri E.. Maternal probiotic supplementation during pregnancy and breast-feeding reduces the risk of eczema in the infant. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 2012 doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2012.09.003 PubMed
39. Ou C.Y., Kuo H.C., Wang L., Hsu T.Y., Chuang H., Liu C.A. et al. Prenatal and postnatal probiotics reduces maternal but not childhood allergic diseases: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Clin. Exp. Allergy. 2012 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2012.04037.x PubMed
40. Lau S., Gerhold K., Zimmermann K., Ockeloen C.W., Rossberg S., Wagner P. et al. Oral application of bacterial lysate in infancy decreases the risk of atopic dermatitis in children with 1 atopic parent in a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 2012 doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2012.02.005 PubMed
41. Allen S.J., Jordan S., Storey M., Thornton C.A., Gravenor M.B., Garaiova I. et al. Probiotics in the prevention of eczema: A randomised controlled trial. Arch. Dis. Child.. 2014 doi:10.1136/archdischild-2013-305799 PubMed
42. Cabana M.D., McKean M., Caughey A.B., Fong L., Lynch S., Wong A. et al. Early Probiotic Supplementation for Eczema and Asthma Prevention: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Pediatrics. 2017 doi:10.1542/peds.2016-3000 PubMed
43. Wickens K., Barthow C., Mitchell E.A., Kang J., van Zyl N., Purdie G. et al. Effects of Lactobacillus rhamnosus HN001 in early life on the cumulative prevalence of allergic disease to 11 years. Pediatr. Allergy Immunol.. 2018 doi:10.1111/pai.12982 PubMed
44. Plummer E.L., Chebar Lozinsky A., Tobin J.M., Uebergang J.B., Axelrad C., Garland S.M. et al. Postnatal probiotics and allergic disease in very preterm infants: Sub-study to the ProPrems randomized trial. Allergy. 2020 doi:10.1111/all.14088 PubMed
45. Schmidt R.M., Pilmann Laursen R., Bruun S., Larnkjaer A., Molgaard C., Michaelsen K.F. et al. Probiotics in late infancy reduce the incidence of eczema: A randomized controlled trial. Pediatr. Allergy Immunol.. 2019 doi:10.1111/pai.13018 PubMed
46. Moro G., Arslanoglu S., Stahl B., Jelinek J., Wahn U., Boehm G.. A mixture of prebiotic oligosaccharides reduces the incidence of atopic dermatitis during the first six months of age. Arch. Dis. Child.. 2006 doi:10.1136/adc.2006.098251 PubMed
47. Ziegler E., Vanderhoof J.A., Petschow B., Mitmesser S.H., Stolz S.I., Harris C.L. et al. Term infants fed formula supplemented with selected blends of prebiotics grow normally and have soft stools similar to those reported for breast-fed infants. J. Pediatr. Gastroenterol. Nutr.. 2007 doi:10.1097/MPG.0b013e31802fca8c PubMed
48. Arslanoglu S., Moro G.E., Schmitt J., Tandoi L., Rizzardi S., Boehm G.. Early dietary intervention with a mixture of prebiotic oligosaccharides reduces the incidence of allergic manifestations and infections during the first two years of life. J. Nutr.. 2008 doi:10.1093/jn/138.6.1091 PubMed
49. Arslanoglu S., Moro G.E., Boehm G., Wienz F., Stahl B., Bertino E.. Early neutral prebiotic oligosaccharide supplementation reduces the incidence of some allergic manifestations in the first 5 years of life. J. Biol. Regul. Homeost. Agents. 2012 PubMed
50. Grüber C., van Stuijvenberg M., Mosca F., Moro G., Chirico G., Braegger C.P. et al. Reduced occurrence of early atopic dermatitis because of immunoactive prebiotics among low-atopy-risk infants. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 2010 doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2010.07.022 PubMed
51. Grüber C., van Stuivenberg M., Mosca F., Moro G., Chirico G., Braegger C.P. et al. Immunoactive prebiotics transiently prevent occurrence of early atopic dermatitis among low-atopy-risk infants. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 2015 doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2015.07.049 PubMed
52. Niele N., van Zwol A., Westerbeek E.A., Lafeber H.N., van Elburg R.M.. Effect of non-human neutral and acidic oligosaccharides on allergic and infectious diseases in preterm infants. Eur. J. Pediatr.. 2013 doi:10.1007/s00431-012-1886-2 PubMed
53. Pontes M.V., Ribeiro T.C., Ribeiro H., de Mattos A.P., Almeida I.R., Leal V.M. et al. Cow’s milk-based beverage consumption in 1- to 4-year-olds and allergic manifestations: An RCT. Nutr. J.. 2016 doi:10.1186/s12937-016-0138-0 PubMed
54. Boyle R.J., Tang M.L., Chiang W.C., Chua M.C., Ismail I., Nauta A. et al. Prebiotic-supplemented partially hydrolysed cow’s milk formula for the prevention of eczema in high-risk infants: A randomized controlled trial. Allergy. 2016 doi:10.1111/all.12848 PubMed
55. Ranucci G., Buccigrossi V., Borgia E., Piacentini D., Visentin F., Cantarutti L. et al. Galacto-Oligosaccharide/Polidextrose Enriched Formula Protects against Respiratory Infections in Infants at High Risk of Atopy: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Nutrients. 2018 doi:10.3390/nu10030286 PubMed
56. Wopereis H., Sim K., Shaw A., Warner J.O., Knol J., Kroll J.S.. Intestinal microbiota in infants at high risk for allergy: Effects of prebiotics and role in eczema development. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 2018 doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2017.05.054 PubMed
57. Majamaa H., Isolauri E.. Probiotics: A novel approach in the management of food allergy. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 1997 doi:10.1016/S0091-6749(97)70093-9 PubMed
58. Isolauri E., Arvola T., Sütas Y., Moilanen E., Salminen S.. Probiotics in the management of atopic eczema. Clin. Exp. Allergy. 2000 doi:10.1046/j.1365-2222.2000.00943.x PubMed
59. Kirjavainen P.V., Salminen S.J., Isolauri E.. Probiotic bacteria in the management of atopic disease: Underscoring the importance of viability. J. Pediatr. Gastroenterol. Nutr.. 2003 doi:10.1097/00005176-200302000-00012 PubMed
60. Viljanen M., Savilahti E., Haahtela T., Juntunen-Backman K., Korpela R., Poussa T. et al. Probiotics in the treatment of atopic eczema/dermatitis syndrome in infants: A double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Allergy. 2005 doi:10.1111/j.1398-9995.2004.00514.x PubMed
61. Weston S., Halbert A., Richmond P., Prescott S.L.. Effects of probiotics on atopic dermatitis: A randomised controlled trial. Arch. Dis. Child.. 2005 doi:10.1136/adc.2004.060673 PubMed
62. Taniuchi S., Hattori K., Yamamoto A., Sasai M., Hatano Y., Kojima T. et al. Administration of Bifidobacterium to Infants with Atopic Dermatitis: Changes in Fecal Microflora and Clinical Symptoms. J. Appl. Res.. 2005
63. Fölster-Holst R., Müller F., Schnopp N., Abeck D., Kreiselmaier I., Lenz T. et al. Prospective, randomized controlled trial on Lactobacillus rhamnosus in infants with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. Br. J. Dermatol.. 2006 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2006.07558.x PubMed
64. Brouwer M.L., Wolt-Plompen S.A., Dubois A.E., van der Heide S., Jansen D.F., Hoijer M.A. et al. No effects of probiotics on atopic dermatitis in infancy: A randomized placebo-controlled trial. Clin. Exp. Allergy. 2006 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2006.02513.x PubMed
65. Grüber C., Wendt M., Sulser C., Lau S., Kulig M., Wahn U. et al. Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG as treatment of atopic dermatitis in infancy. Allergy. 2007 doi:10.1111/j.1398-9995.2007.01543.x PubMed
66. Flinterman A.E., Knol E.F., van Ieperen-van Dijk A.G., Timmerman H.M., Knulst A.C., Bruijnzeel-Koomen C.A. et al. Probiotics have a different immunomodulatory potential in vitro versus ex vivo upon oral administration in children with food allergy. Int. Arch. Allergy Immunol.. 2007 doi:10.1159/000099467 PubMed
67. Van der Aa L.B., Heymans H.S., van Aalderen W.M., Sillevis Smitt J.H., Knol J., Ben Amor K. et al. Effect of a new synbiotic mixture on atopic dermatitis in infants: A randomized-controlled trial. Clin. Exp. Allergy. 2010 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2010.03465.x PubMed
68. Gøbel R., Larsen N., Mølgaard C., Jakobsen M., Michaelsen K.. Probiotics to young children with atopic dermatitis: A randomized placebo-controlled trial. Int. J. Probiotics Prebiotics. 2010
69. Nermes M., Kantele J.M., Atosuo T.J., Salminen S., Isolauri E.. Interaction of orally administered Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG with skin and gut microbiota and humoral immunity in infants with atopic dermatitis. Clin. Exp. Allergy. 2011 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2010.03657.x PubMed
70. Farid R., Ahanchian H., Jabbari F., Moghiman T.. Effect of a new synbiotic mixture on atopic dermatitis in children: A randomized-controlled trial. Iran. J. Pediatr.. 2011 PubMed
71. Gore C., Custovic A., Tannock G.W., Munro K., Kerry G., Johnson K. et al. Treatment and secondary prevention effects of the probiotics Lactobacillus paracasei or Bifidobacterium lactis on early infant eczema: Randomized controlled trial with follow-up until age 3 years. Clin. Exp. Allergy. 2012 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2011.03885.x PubMed
72. Shafiei A., Moin M., Pourpak Z., Gharagozlou M., Aghamohammadi A., Sajedi V. et al. Synbiotics could not reduce the scoring of childhood atopic dermatitis (SCORAD): A randomized double blind placebo-controlled trial. Iran. J. Allergy Asthma Immunol.. 2011 PubMed
73. Ivakhnenko O., Niankovskyy S.. Clinical effectiveness of probiotics in complex treatment of infants with cow’s milk allergy. Georgian Med. News. 2013 PubMed
74. Lin R.J., Qiu L.H., Guan R.Z., Hu S.J., Liu Y.Y., Wang G.J.. Protective effect of probiotics in the treatment of infantile eczema. Exp. Ther Med.. 2015 doi:10.3892/etm.2015.2299 PubMed
75. Yan-hu G.. Clinical effect of microecologics as an adjuvant therapy on infants’ eczema. J. Dalian Med Univ.. 2015
76. Wu Y.J., Wu W.F., Hung C.W., Ku M.S., Liao P.F., Sun H.L. et al. Evaluation of efficacy and safety of Lactobacillus rhamnosus in children aged 4-48 months with atopic dermatitis: An 8-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. J. Microbiol. Immunol. Infect.. 2017 doi:10.1016/j.jmii.2015.10.003 PubMed
77. Rosenfeldt V., Benfeldt E., Nielsen S.D., Michaelsen K.F., Jeppesen D.L., Valerius N.H. et al. Effect of probiotic Lactobacillus strains in children with atopic dermatitis. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 2003 doi:10.1067/mai.2003.389 PubMed
78. Sistek D., Kelly R., Wickens K., Stanley T., Fitzharris P., Crane J.. Is the effect of probiotics on atopic dermatitis confined to food sensitized children?. Clin. Exp. Allergy. 2006 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2006.02485.x PubMed
79. Passeron T., Lacour J.P., Fontas E., Ortonne J.P.. Prebiotics and synbiotics: Two promising approaches for the treatment of atopic dermatitis in children above 2 years. Allergy. 2006 doi:10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00956.x PubMed
80. Gerasimov S.V., Vasjuta V.V., Myhovych O.O., Bondarchuk L.I.. Probiotic supplement reduces atopic dermatitis in preschool children: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial. Am. J. Clin. Dermatol.. 2010 doi:10.2165/11531420-000000000-00000 PubMed
81. Woo S.I., Kim J.Y., Lee Y.J., Kim N.S., Hahn Y.S.. Effect of Lactobacillus sakei supplementation in children with atopic eczema-dermatitis syndrome. Ann. Allergy Asthma Immunol.. 2010 doi:10.1016/j.anai.2010.01.020 PubMed
82. Han Y., Kim B., Ban J., Lee J., Kim B.J., Choi B.S. et al. A randomized trial of Lactobacillus plantarum CJLP133 for the treatment of atopic dermatitis. Pediatr. Allergy Immunol.. 2012 doi:10.1111/pai.12010 PubMed
83. Wu K.G., Li T.H., Peng H.J.. Lactobacillus salivarius plus fructo-oligosaccharide is superior to fructo-oligosaccharide alone for treating children with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis: A double-blind, randomized, clinical trial of efficacy and safety. Br. J. Dermatol.. 2012 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2011.10596.x PubMed
84. Yeşilova Y., Çalka Ö., Akdeniz N., Berktaş M.. Effect of probiotics on the treatment of children with atopic dermatitis. Ann. Dermatol.. 2012 doi:10.5021/ad.2012.24.2.189 PubMed
85. Yang H.J., Min T.K., Lee H.W., Pyun B.Y.. Efficacy of Probiotic Therapy on Atopic Dermatitis in Children: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial. Allergy Asthma Immunol. Res.. 2014 doi:10.4168/aair.2014.6.3.208 PubMed
86. Wang I.J., Wang J.Y.. Children with atopic dermatitis show clinical improvement after Lactobacillus exposure. Clin. Exp. Allergy. 2015 doi:10.1111/cea.12489 PubMed
87. Roessler A., Friedrich U., Vogelsang H., Bauer A., Kaatz M., Hipler U.C. et al. The immune system in healthy adults and patients with atopic dermatitis seems to be affected differently by a probiotic intervention. Clin. Exp. Allergy. 2008 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.2007.02876.x PubMed
88. Yoshida Y., Seki T., Matsunaka H., Watanabe T., Shindo M., Yamada N. et al. Clinical Effects of Probiotic Bifidobacterium breve Supplementation in Adult Patients with Atopic Dermatitis. Yonago Acta Medica. 2010
89. Drago L., Toscano M., De Vecchi E., Piconi S., Iemoli E.. Changing of fecal flora and clinical effect of L. salivarius LS01 in adults with atopic dermatitis. J. Clin. Gastroenterol.. 2012 doi:10.1097/MCG.0b013e318265ef38 PubMed
90. Iemoli E., Trabattoni D., Parisotto S., Borgonovo L., Toscano M., Rizzardini G. et al. Probiotics reduce gut microbial translocation and improve adult atopic dermatitis. J. Clin. Gastroenterol.. 2012 doi:10.1097/MCG.0b013e31826a8468 PubMed
91. Matsumoto M., Ebata T., Hirooka J., Hosoya R., Inoue N., Itami S. et al. Antipruritic effects of the probiotic strain LKM512 in adults with atopic dermatitis. Ann. Allergy Asthma Immunol.. 2014 doi:10.1016/j.anai.2014.05.002 PubMed
92. Drago L., De Vecchi E., Toscano M., Vassena C., Altomare G., Pigatto P.. Treatment of atopic dermatitis eczema with a high concentration of Lactobacillus salivarius LS01 associated with an innovative gelling complex: A pilot study on adults. J. Clin. Gastroenterol.. 2014 doi:10.1097/MCG.0000000000000249 PubMed
93. Nakatsuji T., Hata T.R., Tong Y., Cheng J.Y., Shafiq F., Butcher A.M. et al. Development of a human skin commensal microbe for bacteriotherapy of atopic dermatitis and use in a phase 1 randomized clinical trial. Nat. Med.. 2021 doi:10.1038/s41591-021-01256-2 PubMed
94. Vijayashankar M., Raghunath N.. Pustular Psoriasis Responding to Probiotics—A New Insight. Our Dermatol. Online. 2012 doi:10.7241/ourd.20124.71
95. Groeger D., O’Mahony L., Murphy E.F., Bourke J.F., Dinan T.G., Kiely B. et al. Bifidobacterium infantis 35624 modulates host inflammatory processes beyond the gut. Gut Microbes. 2013 doi:10.4161/gmic.25487 PubMed
96. Navarro-López V., Martínez-Andrés A., Ramírez-Boscá A., Ruzafa-Costas B., Núñez-Delegido E., Carrión-Gutiérrez M.A. et al. Efficacy and Safety of Oral Administration of a Mixture of Probiotic Strains in Patients with Psoriasis: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Acta Derm.-Venereol.. 2019 doi:10.2340/00015555-3305 PubMed
97. Chen Y.H., Wu C.S., Chao Y.H., Lin C.C., Tsai H.Y., Li Y.R. et al. Lactobacillus pentosus GMNL-77 inhibits skin lesions in imiquimod-induced psoriasis-like mice. J. Food Drug Anal.. 2017 doi:10.1016/j.jfda.2016.06.003 PubMed
98. Rather I.A., Bajpai V.K., Huh Y.S., Han Y.-K., Bhat E.A., Lim J. et al. Probiotic Lactobacillus sakei proBio-65 Extract Ameliorates the Severity of Imiquimod Induced Psoriasis-Like Skin Inflammation in a Mouse Model. Front. Microbiol.. 2018 doi:10.3389/fmicb.2018.01021 PubMed
99. Lu W., Deng Y., Fang Z., Zhai Q., Cui S., Zhao J. et al. Potential Role of Probiotics in Ameliorating Psoriasis by Modulating Gut Microbiota in Imiquimod-Induced Psoriasis-Like Mice. Nutrients. 2021 doi:10.3390/nu13062010 PubMed
100. Ogawa C., Inoue R., Yonejima Y., Hisa K., Yamamoto Y., Suzuki T.. Supplemental Leuconostoc mesenteroides strain NTM048 attenuates imiquimod-induced psoriasis in mice. J. Appl. Microbiol.. 2021 doi:10.1111/jam.15161 PubMed
101. Peral M.C., Rachid M.M., Gobbato N.M., Huaman Martinez M.A., Valdez J.C.. Interleukin-8 production by polymorphonuclear leukocytes from patients with chronic infected leg ulcers treated with Lactobacillus plantarum. Clin. Microbiol. Infect.. 2010 doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2009.02793.x PubMed
102. Mohseni S., Bayani M., Bahmani F., Tajabadi-Ebrahimi M., Bayani M.A., Jafari P. et al. The beneficial effects of probiotic administration on wound healing and metabolic status in patients with diabetic foot ulcer: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Diabetes Metab Res. Rev.. 2018 doi:10.1002/dmrr.2970 PubMed
103. Venosi S., Ceccarelli G., de Angelis M., Laghi L., Bianchi L., Martinelli O. et al. Infected chronic ischemic wound topically treated with a multi-strain probiotic formulation: A novel tailored treatment strategy. J. Transl. Med.. 2019 doi:10.1186/s12967-019-2111-0 PubMed
104. Jones M., Ganopolsky J.G., Labbé A., Gilardino M., Wahl C., Martoni C. et al. Novel nitric oxide producing probiotic wound healing patch: Preparation and in vivo analysis in a New Zealand white rabbit model of ischaemic and infected wounds. Int. Wound J.. 2012 doi:10.1111/j.1742-481X.2011.00889.x PubMed
105. Stefia L.V., Lee J., Patel J., de Sousa S.R., Legrand J., Rodero M. et al. Secretome Components from Faecalibacterium prausnitzii Strains A2-165 and AHMP21 Modulate Cutaneous Wound Inflammation. J. Investig. Dermatol.. 2020 doi:10.1016/j.jid.2020.02.027 PubMed
106. Kusumaningsih T., Irmawati A., Ernawati D.S., Prahasanti C., Aljunaid M., Amelia S.. The differences in the number of fibroblasts and blood vessels after the topical and systemic administration of Lactobacillus casei Shirota probiotics for the treatment of traumatic ulcers in Wistar rats (Rattus norvegicus). Vet. World. 2021 doi:10.14202/vetworld.2021.1279-1283 PubMed
107. Vågesjö E., Öhnstedt E., Mortier A., Lofton H., Huss F., Proost P. et al. Accelerated wound healing in mice by on-site production and delivery of CXCL12 by transformed lactic acid bacteria. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2018 doi:10.1073/pnas.1716580115 PubMed
108. Coman M.M., Mazzotti L., Silvi S., Scalise A., Orpianesi C., Cresci A. et al. Antimicrobial activity of SYNBIO(®) probiotic formulation in pathogens isolated from chronic ulcerative lesions: In vitro studies. J. Appl. Microbiol.. 2020 doi:10.1111/jam.14482 PubMed
109. Guéniche A., Cathelineau A.C., Bastien P., Esdaile J., Martin R., Queille Roussel C. et al. Vitreoscilla filiformis biomass improves seborrheic dermatitis. J. Eur. Acad Dermatol. Venereol.. 2008 doi:10.1111/j.1468-3083.2007.02508.x PubMed
110. Reygagne P., Bastien P., Couavoux M.P., Philippe D., Renouf M., Castiel-Higounenc I. et al. The positive benefit of Lactobacillus paracasei NCC2461 ST11 in healthy volunteers with moderate to severe dandruff. Benef Microbes. 2017 doi:10.3920/BM2016.0144 PubMed
111. Peral M.C., Martinez M.A., Valdez J.C.. Bacteriotherapy with Lactobacillus plantarum in burns. Int. Wound J.. 2009 doi:10.1111/j.1742-481X.2008.00577.x PubMed
112. Stefanatou E., Kompoti M., Paridou A., Koutsodimitropoulos I., Giannopoulou P., Markou N. et al. Probiotic sepsis due to Saccharomyces fungaemia in a critically ill burn patient. Mycoses. 2011 doi:10.1111/j.1439-0507.2010.01963.x PubMed
113. Thomson C.H., Hassan I., Dunn K.. Yakult: A role in combating multi-drug resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa?. J. Wound Care. 2012 doi:10.12968/jowc.2012.21.11.566 PubMed
114. Mayes T., Gottschlich M.M., James L.E., Allgeier C., Weitz J., Kagan R.J.. Clinical safety and efficacy of probiotic administration following burn injury. J. Burn Care Res.. 2015 doi:10.1097/BCR.0000000000000139 PubMed
115. El-Ghazely M.H., Mahmoud W.H., Atia M.A., Eldip E.M.. Effect of probiotic administration in the therapy of pediatric thermal burn. Ann. Burn. Fire Disasters. 2016 PubMed
116. Perdanakusuma D.S., Hariani L., Nasser N.F., Datusanantyo R.A.. The effect of a single-strain probiotic administration in the treatment of thermal burns patients. Iran. J. Microbiol.. 2019 doi:10.18502/ijm.v11i3.1335 PubMed
117. Fleming D., Jiang Y., Opoku K., Alhaj Saleh A., Larumbe-Zabala E., Kesey J.E. et al. Prophylactic Probiotics in Burn Patients: Risk versus Reward. J. Burn Care Res.. 2019 doi:10.1093/jbcr/irz132 PubMed
118. Herek O., Kara I.G., Kaleli I.. Effects of antibiotics and Saccharomyces boulardii on bacterial translocation in burn injury. Surg Today. 2004 doi:10.1007/s00595-003-2677-1 PubMed
119. Gong Z.Y., Yuan Z.Q., Dong Z.W., Peng Y.Z.. Glutamine with probiotics attenuates intestinal inflammation and oxidative stress in a rat burn injury model through altered iNOS gene aberrant methylation. Am. J. Transl Res.. 2017 PubMed
120. Valdéz J.C., Peral M.C., 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 doi:10.1111/j.1469-0691.2005.01142.x PubMed
121. Brachkova M.I., Duarte A., Pinto J.F.. Alginate films containing viable Lactobacillus plantarum: Preparation and in vitro evaluation. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2012 doi:10.1208/s12249-012-9753-z PubMed
122. Argenta A., Satish L., Gallo P., Liu F., Kathju S.. Local Application of Probiotic Bacteria Prophylaxes against Sepsis and Death Resulting from Burn Wound Infection. PLoS ONE. 2016 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0165294 PubMed
123. Satish L., Gallo P.H., Johnson S., Yates C.C., Kathju S.. Local Probiotic Therapy with Lactobacillus plantarum Mitigates Scar Formation in Rabbits after Burn Injury and Infection. Surg Infect.. 2017 doi:10.1089/sur.2016.090 PubMed
124. Sürmeli M., Maçin S., Akyön Y., Kayikçioğlu A.U.. The protective effect of Lactobacillus plantarum against meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections: An experimental animal model. J. Wound Care. 2019 doi:10.12968/jowc.2019.28.Sup3b.S29 PubMed
125. Khan M.A., Hussain Z., Ali S., Qamar Z., Imran M., Hafeez F.Y.. Fabrication of Electrospun Probiotic Functionalized Nanocomposite Scaffolds for Infection Control and Dermal Burn Healing in a Mice Model. ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng.. 2019 doi:10.1021/acsbiomaterials.9b01002 PubMed
126. Olguin F., Araya M., Hirsch S., Brunser O., Ayala V., Rivera R. et al. Prebiotic ingestion does not improve gastrointestinal barrier function in burn patients. Burns. 2005 doi:10.1016/j.burns.2004.11.017 PubMed
127. Fabbrocini G., Bertona M., Picazo Ó., Pareja-Galeano H., Monfrecola G., Emanuele E.. Supplementation with Lactobacillus rhamnosus SP1 normalises skin expression of genes implicated in insulin signalling and improves adult acne. Benef. Microbes. 2016 doi:10.3920/BM2016.0089 PubMed
128. Dall’Oglio F., Milani M., Micali G.. Effects of oral supplementation with FOS and GOS prebiotics in women with adult acne: The “S.O. Sweet” study: A proof-of-concept pilot trial. Clin. Cosmet Investig. Dermatol.. 2018 doi:10.2147/CCID.S179627 PubMed
129. Rahmayani T., Putra I.B., Jusuf N.K.. The Effect of Oral Probiotic on the Interleukin-10 Serum Levels of Acne Vulgaris. Open Access Maced J. Med. Sci.. 2019 doi:10.3889/oamjms.2019.718 PubMed
130. Kang B.S., Seo J.G., Lee G.S., Kim J.H., Kim S.Y., Han Y.W. et al. Antimicrobial activity of enterocins from Enterococcus faecalis SL-5 against Propionibacterium acnes, the causative agent in acne vulgaris, and its therapeutic effect. J. Microbiol.. 2009 doi:10.1007/s12275-008-0179-y PubMed
131. Therapeutics Reports Positive Efficacy Results from Phase 2b Clinical Trial of Ammonia Oxidizing Bacteria (AOB) for the Treatment of Acne Vulgaris. 2017
132. Tayupanta T.d.l.A.M., Ocana V.. In vivo Evaluation of the Antagonistic Effect of Lactobacillus acidophilus against Propionobacterium acnes in the Treatment of Acne. J. Pure Appl. Microbiol.. 2019 doi:10.22207/JPAM.13.3.03
133. Al-Ghazzewi F.H., Tester R.F.. Effect of konjac glucomannan hydrolysates and probiotics on the growth of the skin bacterium Propionibacterium acnes in vitro. Int. J. Cosmet Sci. 2010 doi:10.1111/j.1468-2494.2009.00555.x PubMed
134. Kang M.S., Oh J.S., Lee S.W., Lim H.S., Choi N.K., Kim S.M.. Effect of Lactobacillus reuteri on the proliferation of Propionibacterium acnes and Staphylococcus epidermidis. J. Microbiol.. 2012 doi:10.1007/s12275-012-1286-3 PubMed
135. Lee D.K., Kim M.J., Ham J.W., An H.M., Cha M.K., Lee S.W. et al. In vitro evaluation of antibacterial activities and anti-inflammatory effects of Bifidobacterium spp. addressing acne vulgaris. Arch Pharm Res. 2012 doi:10.1007/s12272-012-0614-9 PubMed
136. Khalfallah G., Gartzen R., Möller M., Heine E., Lütticken R.. A New Approach to Harness Probiotics Against Common Bacterial Skin Pathogens: Towards Living Antimicrobials. Probiotics Antimicrob. Proteins. 2021 doi:10.1007/s12602-021-09783-7 PubMed
137. Kunz B., Oranje A.P., Labreze L., Stalder J.F., Ring J., Taieb A.. Clinical validation and guidelines for the SCORAD index: Consensus report of the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis. Dermatology. 1997 doi:10.1159/000245677 PubMed
138. Nutten S.. Atopic dermatitis: Global epidemiology and risk factors. Ann. Nutr. Metab. 2015 doi:10.1159/000370220 PubMed
139. Bjorksten B., Sepp E., Julge K., Voor T., Mikelsaar M.. Allergy development and the intestinal microflora during the first year of life. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.. 2001 doi:10.1067/mai.2001.118130 PubMed
140. Kong H.H., Oh J., Deming C., Conlan S., Grice E.A., Beatson M.A. et al. Temporal shifts in the skin microbiome associated with disease flares and treatment in children with atopic dermatitis. Genome Res.. 2012 doi:10.1101/gr.131029.111 PubMed
141. Kim J.Y., Kwon J.H., Ahn S.H., Lee S.I., Han Y.S., Choi Y.O. et al. Effect of probiotic mix (Bifidobacterium bifidum, Bifidobacterium lactis, Lactobacillus acidophilus) in the primary prevention of eczema: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Pediatr. Allergy Immunol.. 2010 doi:10.1111/j.1399-3038.2009.00958.x PubMed
142. Parisi R., Symmons D.P., Griffiths C.E., Ashcroft D.M.. Global epidemiology of psoriasis: A systematic review of incidence and prevalence. J. Investig. Dermatol.. 2013 doi:10.1038/jid.2012.339 PubMed
143. Langley R.G., Krueger G.G., Griffiths C.E.. Psoriasis: Epidemiology, clinical features, and quality of life. Ann. Rheum. Dis.. 2005 doi:10.1136/ard.2004.033217 PubMed
144. Polkowska-Pruszynska B., Gerkowicz A., Krasowska D.. The gut microbiome alterations in allergic and inflammatory skin diseases—An update. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol.. 2020 doi:10.1111/jdv.15951 PubMed
145. Sonal Sekhar M., Unnikrishnan M.K., Vijayanarayana K., Rodrigues G.S., Mukhopadhyay C.. Topical application/formulation of probiotics: Will it be a novel treatment approach for diabetic foot ulcer?. Med. Hypotheses. 2014 doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2013.11.013 PubMed
146. Vijaya Chandra S.H., Srinivas R., Dawson T.L., Common J.E.. Cutaneous Malassezia: Commensal, Pathogen, or Protector?. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol.. 2021 doi:10.3389/fcimb.2020.614446 PubMed
147. White T.C., Findley K., Dawson T.L., Scheynius A., Boekhout T., Cuomo C.A. et al. Fungi on the skin: Dermatophytes and Malassezia. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med.. 2014 doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a019802 PubMed
148. Kistowska M., Fenini G., Jankovic D., Feldmeyer L., Kerl K., Bosshard P. et al. Malassezia yeasts activate the NLRP3 inflammasome in antigen-presenting cells via Syk-kinase signalling. Exp. Dermatol.. 2014 doi:10.1111/exd.12552 PubMed
149. Perkins M.A., Cardin C.W., Osterhues M.A., Robinson M.K.. A non-invasive tape absorption method for recovery of inflammatory mediators to differentiate normal from compromised scalp conditions. Skin Res. Technol.. 2002 doi:10.1034/j.1600-0846.2002.20337.x PubMed
150. Vlachos C., Schulte B.M., Magiatis P., Adema G.J., Gaitanis G.. Malassezia-derived indoles activate the aryl hydrocarbon receptor and inhibit Toll-like receptor-induced maturation in monocyte-derived dendritic cells. Br. J. Dermatol.. 2012 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2012.11014.x PubMed
151. Lorenzo B., Luca S., Antonio M., Alberto D.M., Cesare F., Omar C.. Effects of Probiotics in the Management of Infected Chronic Wounds: From Cell Culture to Human Studies. Curr. Clin. Pharmacol.. 2020 doi:10.2174/1574884714666191111130630 PubMed
152. De Pessemier B., Grine L., Debaere M., Maes A., Paetzold B., Callewaert C.. Gut-Skin Axis: Current Knowledge of the Interrelationship between Microbial Dysbiosis and Skin Conditions. Microorganisms. 2021 doi:10.3390/microorganisms9020353 PubMed
153. Mottin V.H.M., Suyenaga E.S.. An approach on the potential use of probiotics in the treatment of skin conditions: Acne and atopic dermatitis. Int. J. Dermatol.. 2018 doi:10.1111/ijd.13972 PubMed
154. Fitz-Gibbon S., Tomida S., Chiu B.H., Nguyen L., Du C., Liu M. et al. Propionibacterium acnes strain populations in the human skin microbiome associated with acne. J. Investig. Dermatol.. 2013 doi:10.1038/jid.2013.21 PubMed
155. Bruggemann H., Salar-Vidal L., Gollnick H.P.M., Lood R.. A Janus-Faced Bacterium: Host-Beneficial and -Detrimental Roles of Cutibacterium acnes. Front. Microbiol.. 2021 doi:10.3389/fmicb.2021.673845 PubMed
156. Deng Y., Wang H., Zhou J., Mou Y., Wang G., Xiong X.. Patients with Acne Vulgaris Have a Distinct Gut Microbiota in Comparison with Healthy Controls. Acta Derm. Venereol.. 2018 doi:10.2340/00015555-2968 PubMed
157. Rebello D., Wang E., Yen E., Lio P.A., Kelly C.R.. Hair Growth in Two Alopecia Patients after Fecal Microbiota Transplant. ACG Case Rep. J.. 2017 doi:10.14309/crj.2017.107 PubMed