ReviewAlimentary pharmacology & therapeutics2017
Consensus report: faecal microbiota transfer - clinical applications and procedures.
Review in Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
63 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 109 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fecal microbiota transplantation in obesity: a comprehensive overview from basic research to clinical application.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative effectiveness of treatments for recurrentFrontiers in pharmacology · 2024Pooled it
- Fecal microbiota transplantation for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Pooled it
- Fecal microbiota transplantation in inflammatory bowel disease patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Fecal microbiota transplantation in irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.United European gastroenterology journal · 2019Pooled it
- The Effect of Allogenic Versus Autologous Fecal Microbiota Transfer on Symptoms, Visceral Perception and Fecal and Mucosal Microbiota in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Study.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2019Trial
- Article
- Gut-Brain Signaling in Parkinson's Disease: A Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- The challenges and opportunities in the expanding horizons of microbiota transplant therapies.Gut microbes · 2025Article
- Fecal microbiota transplantation: a tale of two regulatory pathways.Gut microbes · 2025Review
- Review
- Intestinal Microbiota Modulation by Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Exploring the role of gut microbiota in Parkinson's disease: insights from fecal microbiota transplantation.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Review
- Laboratory preparation methods for human-derived fecal microbial suspensions for fecal microbiota transplantation: a review and standardization perspectives.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Evaluation of Bacterial Viability for Fecal Microbiota Transplantation: Impact of Thawing Temperature and Storage Time.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Is the microbiome the cause of irritable bowel syndrome and inflammatory bowel disease? Lessons to consider from odontology.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Review
- What Is the Microbiome? A Description of a Social Network.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2023Review
- Rejuvenating the human gut microbiome.Trends in molecular medicine · 2022Review
- Implementation of fecal microbiota transplantation in a medical center for recurrent or refractory Clostridioides difficile infection and report of preliminary outcome.Biomedical journal · 2022Article
- Adverse events of intestinal microbiota transplantation in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Gut pathogens · 2022Review
3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFaecal microbiota transplantation or transfer (FMT) aims at replacing or reinforcing the gut microbiota of a patient with the microbiota from a healthy donor. Not many controlled or randomised studies have been published evaluating the use of FMT for other diseases than Clostridium difficile infection, making it difficult for clinicians to decide on a suitable indication.
aimTo provide an expert consensus on current clinical indications, applications and methodological aspects of FMT.
methodsWell-acknowledged experts from various countries in Europe have contributed to this article. After literature review, consensus has been achieved by repetitive circulation of the statements and the full manuscript among all authors with intermittent adaptation to comments (using a modified Delphi process). Levels of evidence and agreement were rated according to the GRADE system. Consensus was defined a priori as agreement by at least 75% of the authors.
resultsKey recommendations include the use of FMT in recurrent C. difficile infection characterised by at least two previous standard treatments without persistent cure, as well as its consideration in severe and severe-complicated C. difficile infection as an alternative to total colectomy in case of early failure of antimicrobial therapy. FMT in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and metabolic syndrome should only be performed in research settings.
conclusionsFaecal microbiota transplantation or transfer is a promising treatment for a variety of diseases in which the intestinal microbiota is disturbed. For indications other than C. difficile infection, more evidence is needed before more concrete recommendations can be made.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.