Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34484424›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2021

Systematic review with meta-analysis: encapsulated faecal microbiota transplantation - evidence for clinical efficacy.

Frederik Cold, Simon Mark Dahl Baunwall, Jens Frederik Dahlerup, Andreas Munk Petersen, Christian Lodberg Hvas, Lars Hestbjerg Hansen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Microbiome Therapeutics for Clostridioides difficile Infection.Infectious disease clinics of North America · 2025
    Review
  8. Clostridioides difficile: Treating Sustained Antibiotic Responders With Fecal Microbiota Transplantation Does Not Improve Efficacy.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Frederik ColdDepartment of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Copenhagen University, 1871 Frederiksberg, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2085-8496
Simon Mark Dahl BaunwallDepartment of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5135-7435
Jens Frederik DahlerupDepartment of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Andreas Munk PetersenGastrounit, Medical Division, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Hvidovre, Denmark.
Christian Lodberg HvasDepartment of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Lars Hestbjerg HansenDepartment of Plant and Environmental Sciences, Copenhagen University, Frederiksberg, Denmark.
Aarhus University Hospital · DKUniversity of Copenhagen · DKHvidovre Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFaecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is an effective treatment of recurrent

methodsA systematic review was undertaken of studies using encapsulated FMT up to 26 October 2020. Data on indication, clinical outcomes, safety, treatment protocol and capsule preparation were collected and reported. Pooled rates of clinical efficacy in rCDI were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. The impact of single variables on clinical efficacy was evaluated using univariate meta-regression.

resultsA total of 35 studies reporting the treatment of 960 patients with encapsulated FMT for eight different indications met the inclusion criteria. Most studies (

conclusionsEncapsulated FMT is an effective and safe treatment of rCDI, with cure rates comparable to FMT delivered through other routes. The treatment is effective despite variations in donor screening, preparation and treatment protocol. For other indications, the role of FMT capsules is still not sufficiently examined, although some studies show promising results. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY:

Indexed as

capsulesClostridioides difficileencapsulatedfaecal microbiota transplantationlyophilisationmeta-analysismicrobiomesystematic reviewulcerative colitis

Identifiers

PMID34484424
PMCPMC8414624
OpenAlexW3198416890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.