scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Treatment of Ulcerative Colitis Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
H.L Zhao ◽  
S.Z Chen ◽  
H.M Xu ◽  
J He ◽  
Y.L Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ulcerative Colitis ◽  
Fecal Microbiota Transplantation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Fecal Microbiota ◽  
Efficacy And Safety

scholarly journals Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e0157259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yanqiang Shi ◽  
Yiwei Dong ◽  
Wenhui Huang ◽  
Decong Zhu ◽  
Hua Mao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ulcerative Colitis ◽  
Fecal Microbiota Transplantation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Fecal Microbiota

scholarly journals Fecal Microbiota Transplantation as Therapy for Treatment of Active Ulcerative Colitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Xiaolei Liu ◽  
Yan Li ◽  
Kaichun Wu ◽  
Yongquan Shi ◽  
Min Chen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ulcerative Colitis ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Clinical Remission ◽  
Fecal Microbiota Transplantation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Fecal Microbiota ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Endoscopic Remission

Aim. Increasing evidence supports the role of the gut microbiota in the etiology of ulcerative colitis (UC). Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is a highly effective treatment against recurrent Clostridium difficile infection; however, its efficacy in UC is still controversial. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FMT for treatment of active UC. Methods. We searched Cochrane, Medline, Web of Science, and Embase from inception to February 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults with active UC, which compared FMT with controls, were eligible. The primary outcome was combined clinical remission with endoscopic remission/response. Secondary outcomes included clinical remission, endoscopic remission, and serious adverse events. Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) is reported. Results. Five RCTs with 292 participants were eligible for inclusion. When data were pooled for all patients, FMT was associated with a higher combined clinical remission with endoscopic remission/response; the RR of combined outcome not achieving after FMT vs. control was 0.79 (95% CI 0.70-0.88). FMT delivered via lower gastrointestinal route was superior to upper gastrointestinal route with regard to combined clinical remission with endoscopic remission/response ( RR = 0.79 , 95% CI 0.70-0.89). FMT with pooled donor stool ( RR = 0.69 , 95% CI 0.56-0.85) and higher frequency of administration ( RR = 0.76 , 95% CI 0.62-0.93) may be more effective with regard to clinical remission. There was no statistically significant difference in serious adverse events with FMT compared with controls ( RR = 0.98 , 95% CI 0.93-1.03). Conclusion. FMT shows a promising perspective with comparable safety and favorable clinical efficacy for the treatment of active UC in the short term. However, further larger, more rigorously conducted RCTs of FMT in UC are still needed in order to resolve the controversial questions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document