11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

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

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

          Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.

            The extent of heterogeneity in a meta-analysis partly determines the difficulty in drawing overall conclusions. This extent may be measured by estimating a between-study variance, but interpretation is then specific to a particular treatment effect metric. A test for the existence of heterogeneity exists, but depends on the number of studies in the meta-analysis. We develop measures of the impact of heterogeneity on a meta-analysis, from mathematical criteria, that are independent of the number of studies and the treatment effect metric. We derive and propose three suitable statistics: H is the square root of the chi2 heterogeneity statistic divided by its degrees of freedom; R is the ratio of the standard error of the underlying mean from a random effects meta-analysis to the standard error of a fixed effect meta-analytic estimate, and I2 is a transformation of (H) that describes the proportion of total variation in study estimates that is due to heterogeneity. We discuss interpretation, interval estimates and other properties of these measures and examine them in five example data sets showing different amounts of heterogeneity. We conclude that H and I2, which can usually be calculated for published meta-analyses, are particularly useful summaries of the impact of heterogeneity. One or both should be presented in published meta-analyses in preference to the test for heterogeneity. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Gastroenterol Res Pract
                Gastroenterol Res Pract
                grp
                Gastroenterology Research and Practice
                Hindawi
                1687-6121
                1687-630X
                2021
                23 April 2021
                : 2021
                : 6612970
                Affiliations
                1Department of Medical Insurance, Xijing Hospital, Air Force Medical University, Xi'an, Shaanxi Province 710032, China
                2Department of Gastroenterology, The Affiliated Hospital of Qinghai University, Xining, Qinghai Province 810001, China
                3State Key Laboratory of Cancer Biology, National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases and Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Air Force Medical University, Xi'an, Shaanxi Province 710032, China
                Author notes

                Academic Editor: Paraskevas Gkolfakis

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9515-7577
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3004-2634
                Article
                10.1155/2021/6612970
                8088370
                33981340
                d6cb26eb-dac9-4225-a9c5-ace5d415bd15
                Copyright © 2021 Xiaolei Liu et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 12 December 2020
                : 31 December 2020
                : 8 April 2021
                Funding
                Funded by: National Natural Science Foundation of China
                Award ID: 81873554
                Award ID: 81600443
                Categories
                Review Article

                Gastroenterology & Hepatology
                Gastroenterology & Hepatology

                Comments

                Comment on this article