Both formulas were sold under the same brand name of VSL#3 but sourced from two different production sites. One was in USA and the other was in Italy.
This research paper involved the wound-healing assay as a tool for testing probiotics aimed at protecting gastrointestinal mucosal surfaces and to verify the consistency of their manufacturing.
What they did was to compare the in vitro effects of two multi-strain high concentration formulations on a non-transformed small-intestinal epithelial cell line, IEC-6.
The effects on cellular morphology, viability, migration, and H2 O2 -induced damage, were assessed before and after the treatment with both VSL#3 formulations.
What they found was that the USA-sourced product (“USA-made”) VSL#3 did not affect monolayer morphology and cellular density. Yet, the addition of bacteria from the Italy-derived product (“Italy-made”) caused clear morphological cell damage and strongly reduced cellularity.
This meant that the treatment with “USA-made” lysate led to a higher rate of wounded monolayer healing, compared to the addition of “Italy-made” bacterial lysate which did not influence the closure rate as compared to untreated cells.
While lysates from “USA-made” VSL#3 clearly enhanced the formation of elongated and aligned stress fibers, “Italy-made” lysates did not have similar effect.
“USA-made” lysate was able to cause a total inhibition of H2 O2 -induced cytotoxic effect. Howwever, “Italy-made” VSL#3 lysate wasn’t able to protect IEC-6 cells from H2 O2 -induced damage.
ROS generation was also differently influenced, thus supporting the hypothesis of a protective action of “USA-made” VSL#3 lysates, as well as the idea that “Italy-made” formulation was unable to significantly prevent the H2 O2 -induced oxidative stress.
Read original research article