The Efficacy and Safety of Probiotics in the Management of Chronic Rhinosinusitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

TL;DR

This study reviews whether probiotics can help manage chronic rhinosinusitis, finding they may be safe but not significantly effective, with some hints of potential benefit.

Contribution

A systematic review and meta-analysis of probiotics for chronic rhinosinusitis, including mechanistic insights and safety evaluation.

Findings

Probiotics showed a non-significant trend toward improving SNOT scores and reducing CRS relapse rates.

Adverse events were mild and similar to placebo.

Intranasal Lactococcus lactis W136 may downregulate inflammation and increase microbiome diversity.

Abstract

Background/Objectives: In this study, we aimed to evaluate probiotics’ clinical efficacy and safety in adults with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), and summarize mechanistic evidence related to mucosal immunity and microbiota modulation. Methods: We performed a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis. MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched until May 2025. Eligibility: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and mechanistic studies investigating probiotics (any strain, dose, or administration route) in adults with CRS were eligible. Primary outcomes included changes in Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-20/22) scores and CRS relapse rates. Secondary outcomes were adverse events and mechanistic endpoints. Results: Six studies (four RCTs, n = 337; two mechanistic studies) met the inclusion criteria. Probiotics did not significantly improve SNOT scores compared with the placebo, but trended in that direction (pooled mean difference—2.70; 95% CI −7.12 to 1.72; I2 = 0%). Furthermore, probiotic use was associated with a non-significant trend towards fewer CRS relapses (risk ratio 0.41; 95% CI 0.16–1.04; p = 0.06; I2 = 48%). Adverse events were mild and comparable to the placebo (risk ratio 0.87; 95% CI 0.33–2.34). Mechanistic data indicated that intranasal Lactococcus lactis W136 might downregulate type 1 inflammatory pathways and modestly increase microbiome diversity. Subgroup analyses (by route, duration, and CRS subtype) revealed no statistically significant effect modifiers, though mechanistic insights suggest possible differences in efficacy based on the CRS endotype and delivery method. Conclusions: Probiotics appear safe and may provide a small, non-significant improvement in CRS symptoms; emerging evidence of reduced relapse rates warrants further investigation through larger, endotype-stratified trials utilizing targeted probiotic strains and optimized delivery methods.

Figures