SynthesisBMC gastroenterology2025
The impact of fecal microbiota transplantation on refractory ulcerative colitis: A systematic review and Meta-Analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Synthesis in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fecal microbiota transplantation in ulcerative colitis: mucosal immune mechanisms and precision microbiota therapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRefractory ulcerative colitis (UC), characterized by persistent disease activity despite optimized medical therapy, poses a significant therapeutic challenge. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has shown promise in inducing remission in active ulcerative colitis (UC) by restoring gut microbial balance; however, its efficacy in refractory cases remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of FMT in achieving clinical and endoscopic remission in patients with refractory UC, based on evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
methodsWe searched PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science up to February 2025 for RCTs comparing FMT to placebo or standard care in adults with refractory UC (Mayo Score ≥ 3 despite treatment). Primary outcomes were clinical remission (Mayo Score ≤ 2, no subscore > 1) and endoscopic remission (Mayo endoscopic subscore ≤ 1). Data were pooled using a random-effects model, with heterogeneity assessed via I² and Q-tests. Subgroup analyses explored age at diagnosis and disease duration as moderators. The review followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420250651790).
resultsSix RCTs were included. FMT showed no significant effect on clinical remission (pooled estimate - 0.2584; 95% CI - 0.9031 to 0.3863; p = 0.4321) or endoscopic remission (pooled estimate - 0.2229; 95% CI - 0.8811 to 0.4353; p = 0.5069), with no heterogeneity (I² = 0.00%). Subgroup analyses revealed no moderation by age or disease duration (p > 0.27). Adverse events were mild and transient.
conclusionFMT does not significantly improve clinical or endoscopic remission in refractory UC, suggesting limited efficacy in this population despite a favorable safety profile. Larger, standardized trials are warranted.
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.