ArticlePloS one2022
Challenges and costs of donor screening for fecal microbiota transplantations.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility and efficacy of fecal microbiota transplantation in adolescents with refractory irritable bowel syndrome: A randomized clinical pilot trial.Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition · 2026Trial
- Transient colonization with Blastocystis spp. after transmission via fecal microbiota transplantation.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025Trial
- Phage-microbe dynamics after sterile faecal filtrate transplantation in individuals with metabolic syndrome: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial assessing efficacy and safety.Nature communications · 2023Trial
- An Integrated Dataset of Clinical and Microbial Profiles for Fecal Microbiota Transplantation.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Lower prevalence of Blastocystis spp. and Dientamoeba fragilis in ulcerative colitis and association with disease activity.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Article
- Treating Initial and RecurrentMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Review
- Emerging Therapeutic Approaches for Modulating the Intestinal Microbiota.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Evaluation of the efficacy of inactivated fecal transplants against Clostridioides difficile: an in vitro study.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2026Article
- Fecal Microbiota Transplantation Donor Screening: IsMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Characteristics and longitudinal stability of Gut Microbiota in healthy individuals across different age groups.Current research in microbial sciences · 2026Article
- Exploring Fecal Microbiota Transplantation: Potential Benefits, Associated Risks, and Challenges in Cancer Treatment.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Review
- A multi-step screening algorithm for fecal microbiota transplantation donors: integrating metagenomic and metabolomic profiling for improved safety and donor quality assessment.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Improving Clinical Outcomes of Encapsulated Faecal Microbiota Transplantation for Clostridioides difficile Infection Through Empirical Donor Selection and Optimised Dosing: A Quality Improvement Study.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2026Article
- The role of the early-life gut microbiome in childhood asthma.Gut microbes · 2025Review
- Unraveling Type 1 Diabetes: Integrating Microbiome, Metabolomics, and Immunomodulation for Next-Generation Therapies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- The Gut Microbiome and Colistin Resistance: A Hidden Driver of Antimicrobial Failure.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Integrative systems biology approaches for analyzing microbiome dysbiosis and species interactions.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Review
- Gut Microbiota Modulation in IBD: From the Old Paradigm to Revolutionary Tools.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe increasing interest to perform and investigate the efficacy of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has generated an urge for feasible donor screening. We report our experience with stool donor recruitment, screening, follow-up, and associated costs in the context of clinical FMT trials.
methodsPotential stool donors, aged between 18-65 years, underwent a stepwise screening process starting with an extensive questionnaire followed by feces and blood investigations. When eligible, donors were rescreened for MDROs and SARS-CoV-2 every 60-days, and full rescreening every 4-6 months. The costs to find and retain a stool donor were calculated.
resultsFrom January 2018 to August 2021, 393 potential donors underwent prescreening, of which 202 (51.4%) did not proceed primarily due to loss to follow-up, medication use, or logistic reasons (e.g. COVID-19 measures). 191 potential donors filled in the questionnaire, of which 43 (22.5%) were excluded. The remaining 148 candidates underwent parasitology screening: 91 (61.5%) were excluded, mostly due to Dientamoeba fragilis and/or high amounts of Blastocystis spp. After additional feces investigations 18/57 (31.6%) potential donors were excluded (mainly for presence of Helicobacter Pylori and ESBL-producing organisms). One donor failed serum testing. Overall, 38 out of 393 (10%) potential donors were enrolled. The median participation time of active stool donors was 13 months. To recruit 38 stool donors, €64.112 was spent.
conclusionRecruitment of stool donors for FMT is challenging. In our Dutch cohort, failed eligibility of potential donors was often caused by the presence of the protozoa Dientamoeba fragilis and Blastocystis spp.. The exclusion of potential donors that carry these protozoa, especially Blastocystis spp., is questionable and deserves reconsideration. High-quality donor screening is associated with substantial costs.
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.