ArticleScientific reports2025
Efficacy of oral and rectal administration of human faecal microbiota transplant (FMT) in human microbiota-associated mouse models.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Humanizing Zophobas morio larvae microbiota for rapid screening of emerging decolonization strategies against multidrug-resistant bacteria.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Clinical benefit of faecal microbiota transplantation administered via a single retention enema as an adjunctive treatment in dogs with chronic enteropathy: a randomised controlled trial.The Journal of small animal practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The gut microbiome has gained significant interest due to its association with immune dysregulation, allergies, autoimmune conditions, metabolic disorders, and inflammation-associated malignancies. Understanding underlying mechanisms requires appropriate in vivo models, such as human microbiota-associated mouse models to study the microbiota-host interactions. This study compared the efficacy of oral and rectal administration of human faecal microbiota transplant (FMT) from a single donor in C57BL/6J germ-free mice as these methods are often used interchangeably. Using 16S rRNA sequencing, we quantified colonisation efficacy in luminal and tissue samples from orally- (n = 6) and rectally- (n = 6) colonised mice. We detected 84 genera in the FMT sample, 17 of which were not transferred at all, while additional 7 genera were found exclusively in rectally-colonised mice. A significantly higher proportion of amplicon sequence variants (ASVs) (33% vs. 26%; P < 0.05) and genera (32% vs. 25%; P < 0.05) were absent in orally- compared to rectally-colonised group. Some taxa showed different relative abundances in human vs. mouse samples (e.g. Alistipes and Bacteroides relatively more abundant in mice while Faecalibacterium considerably decreased). Beta diversity analysis revealed greater similarity between FMT and tissue samples irrespective of the administration route, with distinct separation of the tissue and luminal samples. Overall, rectal administration yielded more overlapping genera and ASVs with FMT, highlighting that it could have advantages compared with oral administration for microbiota establishment studies.
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.