ArticleEClinicalMedicine2020
Economic evaluation of Faecal microbiota transplantation compared to antibiotics for the treatment of recurrent
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-Effectiveness of Hospital-at-Home and Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Treating Older Patients With Clostridioides difficile.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025Trial
- The gut-heart axis in atrial fibrillation: Pathophysiology, evidence, and therapeutic potential.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Review
- Increasing patient access to faecal microbiota transplantation with remote delivery: a cost analysis of outpatient versus home-based treatment.Health economics review · 2025Article
- The Role of Akkermansia muciniphila in Disease Regulation.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2025Review
- Advances in Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Gut Dysbiosis-Related Diseases.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- A Comparison of Currently Available and Investigational Fecal Microbiota Transplant Products for RecurrentAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Antimicrobial Prescribing in the Treatment of Clostridioides Difficile Infection in England.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2023Article
- Fecal microbiota transplantation for treatment of refractory or recurrentFrontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- The evaluation of fecal microbiota transplantation vs vancomycin in a Clostridioides difficile infection model.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Microbiota-Immune Interactions in Ulcerative Colitis and Colitis Associated Cancer and Emerging Microbiota-Based Therapies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Health economic evaluations comparing faecal microbiota transplantation with antibiotics for treatment of recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection: a systematic review.Health economics review · 2021Review
- Economic burden and cost-effectiveness of therapies forTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2021Review
- Adverse events of fecal microbiota transplantation: a meta-analysis of high-quality studies.Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background
methodA cost utility analysis was conducted using a decision model representing the cost per additional Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective. A Markov model was constructed to compare FMT NGT and colonoscopy to antibiotic treatment (fidaxomicin or vancomycin). The model was informed by a literature review of clinical evidence, specifically focussing on hospitalised patients with rCDI over 65 years. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess uncertainties around the model inputs and assumptions.
findingsThe base case analysis showed that FMT is a less costly and more effective treatment than either fidaxomicin or vancomycin. FMT colonoscopy was slightly more effective than FMT NGT leading to an additional 0.012 QALYs but more expensive and the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £242,514/QALY. The Probabilistic sensitivity analysis based on 10,000 simulations suggested the probability of FMT NGT being cost effective was almost 78% at £20,000/QALY Willingness-To-Pay (WTP) threshold.
interpretationFMT is both more effective and less costly option than antimicrobial therapy. FMT NGT was the preferred route of administration and is likely to be considered the most cost-effective strategy by decision makers given current acceptable thresholds.
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.