ReviewDigestive diseases and sciences2022
Heterogeneity of Randomized Controlled Trials of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection.
Review in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Targeting the Microbiota-Gut-Brain Axis: Emerging Nanomedicine Approaches for Neurodegenerative Diseases.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Review
- Fecal microbiota transplant and its usefulness in hepatic disorders: a systematic review.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Review
- Live biotherapeutic products: a capstone for prevention of recurrentFrontiers in microbiomes · 2024Review
- Retrospective Analysis of the Safety and Efficacy of Fecal Microbiota, Live-jslm (REBYOTAOpen forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Delivery of Fecal Material to Terminal Ileum Is Associated with Long-Term Success of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2023Article
- The real efficacy of microbiota restoration following standard of care antimicrobial in patients with recurrentTranslational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2023Article
- Resolution rates in clinical trials for microbiota restoration for recurrentTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2023Article
- The Role of Microbiome-Based Therapeutics in Clostridioides difficile Infection: Durable, Long-Term Results of RBX2660.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2023Article
- Utility of Human Relevant Preclinical Animal Models in Navigating NAFLD to MAFLD Paradigm.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- ADS024, aFrontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Clinical burden of recurrentAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionClinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy of FMT for reduction in CDI recurrences (rCDI), but this treatment and its reporting in the literature has significant heterogeneity. Recent publications (e.g., Ramai et al. in Dig Dis Sci 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-020-06185-7 ) present the clinical outcomes for different FMT methodologies. However, to understand, compare, and contextualize outcomes, this heterogeneity in methods and reporting must be understood.
methodsWe performed a literature review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of FMT for rCDI to evaluate heterogeneity among trials. A methodical search between January 2010 and May 2019 of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane was conducted for studies investigating FMT in adults with rCDI. RCTs were evaluated for a variety of methodological and reporting criteria.
resultsEight RCTs were identified, wherein 14 different FMT preparations were considered (each with distinct protocols for processing, storage, administration, and dosing). Sample sizes were generally small, with only two studies performing FMT in more than 100 patients. Three studies used non-FMT controls (vancomycin), while the remaining compared FMT with differing routes of administration or formulations. Across the identified studies, there was no standardized manner for reporting the timing of the FMT procedure. All studies tracked adverse events; however, follow-up periods were limited.
conclusionsConsiderable variability exists among RCTs, with marked differences in study design, control groups, and outcome assessment. Lack of a standard-of-care control in many trials may impact reproducibility of FMT trial outcomes in patients with rCDI. Widespread use of FMT for rCDI is still investigational; therefore, these foundational studies provide opportunities to optimize future trials.
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.