ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Two modified colonoscopically guided fecal microbiota transplantation catheter placement methods: a retrospective study (with video).
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction: Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) transfers fecal microbiota from a healthy person into a patient for the treatment of various diseases. This study introduces two modified colonoscopically guided fecal microbiota transplantation catheter placement methods and evaluates their effectiveness and safety in clinical use. Methods: This study retrospectively reviewed medical records and corresponding endoscopist operational records of FMT patients at Shenzhen Hospital, Southern Medical University, from January 13, 2022, to July 26, 2024. The study analyzed 117 cases, divided into the Direct Loop Clamping (DLC) group and the Clip Loop Binding (CLB) group. The primary outcome was the catheter placement success rate. The secondary outcomes were operation-related times and adverse events. Results: Both groups achieved a 100% success rate in catheter placement. The two methods showed no significant differences in cecal intubation time, withdrawal time, and total operation time. What's more, the CLB group had a slightly shorter time for the first endoscopic clip securement (median 1.8 min vs. 3.7 min, Conclusion: Both modified colonoscopically guided fecal microbiota transplantation catheter placement methods demonstrated safety and effectiveness in securing the FMT catheter, meeting the needs of patients requiring multiple FMT treatments over a short period. However, further validation through large-scale randomized controlled trials is needed.
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.