ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2025
A narrative review on fecal microbiota transplantation routes in ulcerative colitis: identifying the optimal approach across key parameters.
Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 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.
- Specificity vs. Synergy Between Single-Strain and Multi-Strain Probiotics for Ulcerative Colitis Treatment: A Review of the Literature.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Probiotics for ulcerative colitis: mechanisms, therapeutic advances, and emerging strategies.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
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
Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has gained increasing attention as a novel therapeutic approach for treating ulcerative colitis (UC), a chronic inflammatory bowel disease that causes an imbalance in the gut microbiota. Although FMT has demonstrated the potential to induce remission in UC patients, the most effective route of administration remains an area of active investigation. This narrative review provides a comprehensive comparison of different FMT delivery methods, such as oral capsules, enemas, colonoscopy, and nasogastric or nasoenteric tubes, across a range of clinically relevant parameters, including efficacy, safety, patient satisfaction, microbiota changes, pretreatment protocols, and cost-effectiveness. Furthermore, we examined how post-FMT dietary interventions may influence microbial engraftment and improve the long-term outcomes in patients with UC. In addition to assessing these practical and clinical factors, this review highlights the importance of patient-centered considerations, such as the tolerability and convenience of each administration route. The integration of these findings can provide valuable insights into how different FMT routes affect disease outcomes and guide clinicians in optimizing the treatment for individual patients. By synthesizing current evidence on these key variables, we aimed to identify the most effective and feasible FMT approach for UC. Establishing standardized protocols for FMT administration, informed by this analysis, will be crucial for ensuring consistency in clinical practice, improving patient outcomes, and minimizing adverse events. The insights from this review will help pave the way for more targeted and individualized FMT strategies, ultimately enhancing the therapeutic landscape of UC management.
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.