Erratum to: In canine acute diarrhoea with no identifiable cause, does daily oral probiotic improve the clinical outcomes?Jacqueline Oi Ping Tong Student1*
1University of Edinburgh, Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, Easter Bush Campus, Midlothian EH25 9RG
*Corresponding Author (email@example.com)
Vol 5, Issue 4 (2020)
Erratum published: 09 Dec 2020
Original paper published: 10 Oct 2019
The original article was published in Veterinary Evidence Vol 4, Issue 4 (2019): https://doi.org/10.18849/ve.v4i4.252
Veterinary Evidence received a letter 1/10/2020 from Walder Wyss attorneys, counsel to Actial Farmaceutica Srl (“Actial”), owner of the rights to the high-concentration, multi-bacterial strain probiotic product known as VSL#3®. Within the published Knowledge Summary Tong, J.O.P. (2019). In canine acute diarrhoea with no identifiable cause, does daily oral probiotic improve the clinical outcomes?. Veterinary Evidence, 4(4). DOI: 10.18849/VE.V4I4.252 the author, Jacqueline Tong, appraised the paper Ziese, A., Suchodolski, J., Hartmann, K., Busch, K., Anderson, A., Sarwar, F., Sindern, N., & Unterer, S. (2018). Effect of probiotic treatment on the clinical course, intestinal microbiome, and toxigenic Clostridium perfringens in dogs with acute hemorrhagic diarrhea. PLOS ONE, 13(9), e0204691. DOI: 1371/journal.pone.0204691 this paper listed incorrect active ingredients of the product Visbiome.
The strains referred to with the DSM codes, and that were published in the Knowledge Summary are as follows:
Upon a judgement issued by the Court of Rome confirming that the mentioned deposits did not belong to Prof. De Simone but to their client, Actial was able to secure access to such DSMZ accounts and have samples of the bacterial strains in those accounts independently tested by the Belgian Coordinated Collections of Microorganisms (BCCM) located in Ghent, Belgium. Actial discovered that 5 of the 8 accounts contain bacterial strains different from those referred to in the documentation of the Visbiome® product which were mentioned in the publication published in PLoS which was appraised in our published Knowledge Summary. In particular, the recent testing has determined that, contrary to representations in such products’ information and marketing materials:
– DSM 24731 does not contain Streptococcus thermophilus but rather, Lactobacillus plantarum;
– DSM 24734 does not contain Lactobacillus delbruckeii subspieces bulgar-icus but rather Pediococcus pentosaceus;
– DSM 24735 does not contain Lactobacillus acidophilus but rather Lacto-bacillus plantarum;
– DSM 24736 does not contain Bifidobacterium longum but rather Bifidobacterium animalis; and
– DSM 24737 does not contain Bifidobacterium infantis but rather a mix of various bacteria including Lactobacillus paracasei, Lactobacillus acidophilus and Bifidobacterium animalis.
Thus the details in the published Knowledge Summary have been corrected from:
No fault for this error can be attributed to the Knowledge Summary author Jacqueline Tong nor the Veterinary Evidence journal.
The corrections have been made in both the HTML and PDF versions.
Intellectual Property Rights
Authors of Knowledge Summaries submitted to RCVS Knowledge for publication will retain copyright in their work, and will be required to grant to RCVS Knowledge a non-exclusive licence of the rights of copyright in the materials including but not limited to the right to publish, re-publish, transmit, sell, distribute and otherwise use the materials in all languages and all media throughout the world, and to licence or permit others to do so.