Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31009405›Full record

Trial reportClinical and translational gastroenterology2019

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.

Savanne Holster, Carl Mårten Lindqvist, Dirk Repsilber, Anne Salonen, Willem M de Vos, Julia König, Robert J Brummer

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical and translational gastroenterology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
9.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 112 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Fecal Microbiota Transplantation BeyondJournal of Korean medical science · 2026
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Savanne HolsterNutrition-Gut-Brain Interactions Research Centre, Faculty of Health and Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Carl Mårten LindqvistNutrition-Gut-Brain Interactions Research Centre, Faculty of Health and Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Dirk RepsilberNutrition-Gut-Brain Interactions Research Centre, Faculty of Health and Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Anne SalonenHuman Microbiome Research Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Willem M de VosHuman Microbiome Research Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Julia KönigNutrition-Gut-Brain Interactions Research Centre, Faculty of Health and Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Robert J BrummerNutrition-Gut-Brain Interactions Research Centre, Faculty of Health and Medicine, School of Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
Örebro University · SEUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesFecal microbiota transfer (FMT) is suggested as a potential treatment for patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We aimed to study the effect of allogenic and autologous FMT on IBS symptoms, visceral sensitivity, and compositional changes in fecal and mucosa-adherent microbiota.

methodsSeventeen patients with IBS were randomized either to receive fecal material from a healthy donor (allogenic) or to receive their own fecal material (autologous). The fecal material was administered into the cecum by whole colonoscopy after bowel cleansing.

resultsNo significant differences were found between the allogenic and the autologous FMT regarding symptom scores. However, symptom scores of patients receiving allogenic fecal material significantly decreased after FMT compared with baseline (P = 0.02), which was not the case in the autologous group (P = 0.16). Visceral sensitivity was not affected except for a small beneficial effect on urge scores in the autologous group (P < 0.05). While both fecal and mucosa-adherent microbiota of some patients shifted to their respective donor's fecal microbiota, some patients showed no relevant microbial changes after allogenic FMT. Large compositional shifts in fecal and mucosa-adherent microbiota also occurred in the autologous group.

conclusionsThis study showed that a single FMT by colonoscopy may have beneficial effects in IBS; however, the allogenic fecal material was not superior to the autologous fecal material. This suggests that bowel cleansing prior to the colonoscopy and/or processing of the fecal material as part of the FMT routine contribute to symptoms and gut microbiota composition changes in IBS.

Indexed as

AdultFecal Microbiota TransplantationFecesFemaleGastrointestinal MicrobiomeHumansIrritable Bowel SyndromeMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementTransplantation, AutologousTransplantation, HomologousTreatment OutcomeVisceral Pain

Identifiers

PMID31009405
PMCPMC6602784
OpenAlexW2941740662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.