Anise oil liquid

Background and aimsAntispasmodics and antidepressants are standard therapies for managing both the gastrointestinal symptoms and psychological comorbidities associated with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). However, direct comparative evidence regarding their efficacy across different symptom domains is scarce. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to assess the relative effectiveness of these agents on abdominal pain, psychological outcomes, overall IBS symptom severity, and quality of life (QoL).MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus to identify relevant randomized controlled trials evaluating antispasmodics and antidepressants for IBS. Eligible studies underwent quality assessment and were synthesized using network meta-analysis. We calculated standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for pain outcomes (VAS), anxiety, depression, the IBS Severity Scoring System (IBS-SSS), and QoL.ResultsTwenty-nine studies were included in the analysis. Significant reductions in pain (VAS) were observed with imipramine (SMD -34.06; 95%CI -51.89 to -16.22) and the alverine/simethicone combination (SMD -6.23; 95%CI -9.93 to -2.53), while mebeverine and anise oil showed benefits in specific IBS subgroups. The most substantial improvements in anxiety occurred with flupentixol-melitracen (SMD -6.63; 95%CI -10.13 to -3.13), followed by small-intestinal release peppermint oil, fluoxetine, and vortioxetine. Imipramine was most effective for depressive symptoms (SMD -9.40; 95%CI -10.29 to -8.51), followed by venlafaxine, flupentixol-melitracen, desipramine, and vortioxetine. Amitriptyline was the only agent to show significant improvement in IBS-SSS scores (SMD -23.70; 95%CI -43.27 to -4.13). The largest gains in QoL were associated with otilonium bromide (SMD 30.90; 95%CI 26.62 to 35.18), followed by venlafaxine, amitriptyline, and cumin sofouf.ConclusionsImipramine and alverine/simethicone were superior for reducing abdominal pain, whereas flupentixol-melitracen, peppermint oil, fluoxetine, and vortioxetine demonstrated the strongest anxiolytic effects. Effective options for depression included imipramine, venlafaxine, flupentixol-melitracen, desipramine, and vortioxetine. Notably, amitriptyline uniquely improved overall IBS severity scores, while otilonium bromide, venlafaxine, amitriptyline, and cumin sofouf provided the greatest benefits for QoL. These findings clarify comparative efficacy and may guide tailored pharmacotherapy strategies for IBS patients.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND

The increasing demand for sustainable livestock production has intensified interest in phytogenic feed additives (PFAs) as viable alternatives to conventional growth promoters and antibiotics. Derived from plant-based sources such as herbs, spices, and essential oils, PFAs have demonstrated significant potential to enhance production performance, improve gut health, and mitigate environmental impact in non-ruminant systems. Bioactive compounds such as thymol, carvacrol, menthol, and anethole play a crucial role in modulating gut microbiota, strengthening immune responses, and reducing gastrointestinal disorders. Their antimicrobial and antioxidant properties further support animal health while reducing antibiotic dependence, addressing growing concerns over antimicrobial resistance. Additionally, they contribute to improved nutrient digestibility and feed efficiency, leading to enhanced growth performance. From an environmental perspective, their use is associated with lower greenhouse gas emissions and reduced waste contamination, aligning with sustainability goals in modern livestock systems. PFAs improve feed efficiency, leading to reduced feed waste and lower resource input, which in turn decreases the environmental burden of livestock production. Additionally, their antimicrobial properties may reduce the need for synthetic chemicals in animal health management, further minimizing the release of harmful substances into the environment. Despite these promising benefits, inconsistencies in research findings highlight the need for further studies to determine optimal inclusion levels and clarify their mechanisms of action. Future research should focus on developing standardized formulations, improving bioavailability, and assessing long-term effects on animal health and performance. Additionally, advancements in delivery technologies and synergistic combinations with other feed additives could enhance their efficacy. By synthesizing the latest developments, this review underscores the potential of PFAs as a strategic tool for optimizing non-ruminant productivity, ensuring animal welfare, and promoting environmentally sustainable livestock production.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC