ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2026
Changes in sexual-function scores after washed microbiota transplantation in men with sexual dysfunction: an exploratory single-arm pre-post observational study.
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: Current therapies for male sexual dysfunction (MSD) exhibit variable efficacy and potential adverse effects. Washed microbiota transplantation (WMT) is an emerging microbiota-based intervention, but its clinical relevance to MSD remains unclear. This exploratory single-arm pre-post observational study aimed to describe within-subject changes in sexual function, sexual quality of life, sex hormones, and gut microbiota profiles before and after WMT in men receiving WMT for established clinical indications. Methods: A total of 37 male patients receiving WMT were enrolled, including 16 patients with baseline MSD and 21 patients with normal baseline sexual function. All participants received WMT via the lower gastrointestinal tract, and no placebo, sham, untreated, or standard-care control group was included. Sexual function and quality of life were evaluated using the Sexual Life Quality Questionnaire (SLQQ) and the Arizona Male Sexual Experience Scale (ASEX), which were designated as the primary exploratory endpoint. Serum sex hormone levels and gut microbiota profiles characterized by 16S rRNA gene sequencing were defined as secondary exploratory outcomes. The primary sexual-function analyses were based on within-subject pre-post comparisons, and no formal power calculation was performed for the secondary hormone or microbiome outcomes. Results: In within-subject analyses, favorable changes in sexual-function scores were observed at one-month follow-up in the baseline MSD group: 10 of 16 patients no longer met the ASEX-defined MSD threshold, ASEX scores decreased, and SLQQ scores increased. However, because this was an uncontrolled single-arm pre-post analysis, these changes cannot be attributed causally to WMT and may partly reflect placebo or expectancy effects, regression to the mean, natural symptom fluctuation, concurrent care, or improvement in the underlying chronic conditions for which WMT was administered. The hormone and microbiota analyses were limited by the small number of patients with baseline MSD. Therefore, the non-significant hormone findings should be interpreted as inconclusive rather than as evidence of no endocrine involvement, and the microbiota findings should be regarded as exploratory and susceptible to both type I and type II errors. Conclusion: In this exploratory single-arm pre-post observational cohort, favorable within-subject changes in sexual-function and sexual quality-of-life scores were observed at one-month follow-up after WMT. However, because the study lacked a placebo, sham-procedure, untreated, or standard-of-care control arm, these changes should not be interpreted as evidence of therapeutic efficacy. The findings are hypothesis-generating and require validation in adequately powered randomized placebo- or sham-controlled trials.
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.