Fig. 1. Effect of lactulose-probiotics and lactulose-magnesium hydroxide mixtures on (A) number of stools, and (B) weight and (C) water content of feces in mice with loperamide-induced constipation at 2 weeks. Data are presented as mean±SEM (n=6). NOR: normal group (0.9% saline), CON: loperamide-control group (0.9% saline), LAC: lactulose (3 mL/kg), PB1: lactulose 3 mL/kg+probiotic 1 (Bacillus subtilis and Enterococcus faecium, 6×10⁸ CFU/kg/d), PB2: lactulose 3 mL/kg+probiotic 2 (Lactobacillus rhamnosus R0011 and Lactobacillus helveticus R0052, 8×10⁸ CFU/kg/d), PB3: lactulose 3 mL/kg+probiotic 3 (Saccharomyces boulardii, 2×10⁹ CFU/kg/d), PB4: lactulose 3 mL/kg+probiotic 4 (Bacillus licheniformis, 3×10⁸ CFU/kg/d), Mg-L: lactulose 3 mL/kg+Mg(OH)₂ (100 mg/kg), Mg-H: lactulose 3 mL/kg+Mg(OH)₂ (200 mg/kg). In all experimental groups, except the NOR group, constipation was induced by the oral administration of loperamide (5 mg/kg) twice a day. Different symbols indicate significance at ***P<0.001 vs. NOR group, and ^#P<0.05, ^##P<0.01, and ^###P<0.001 vs. CON group, according to Tukey’s test. Different letters (a-d) represent significant differences (P<0.05) among experimental groups as assessed by Tukey’s multiple range test. ns, not significant.

Prev Nutr Food Sci 2023;28:427~435 https://doi.org/10.3746/pnf.2023.28.4.427