BACKGROUND: Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has been investigated as a treatment option for patients with inflammatory bowel disease with controversial results.We sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the benefit of FMT in patients with ulcerative colitis.
METHODS: Double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including adult patients with active ulcerative colitis who received either FMT or placebo were eligible for inclusion. Outcomes of interest included the rate of combined clinical and endoscopic remission, endoscopic remission or response, clinical remission or response, and specific adverse events. The results were pooled together using Reviewer Manager 5.4 software. Publication bias was assessed using the Egger's test.
RESULTS: Six RCTs involving 324 patients were included. Our findings demonstrate that compared with placebo, FMT has significant benefit in inducing combined clinical and endoscopic remission (odds ratio, 4.11; 95% confidence interval, 2.19-7.72; P < .0001). Subgroup analyses of influencing factors showed no differences between pooled or single stool donors (P = .71), fresh or frozen FMT (P = .35), and different routes or frequencies of delivery (P = .80 and .48, respectively). Pre-FMT antibiotics, bowel lavage, concomitant biologic therapy, and topical rectal therapy did not affect combined remission rates (P values of .47, .38, .28, and .40, respectively). Clinical remission or response and endoscopic remission or response were significantly higher in patients who received FMT compared with placebo (P < .05) without any differences in serious or specific adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: FMT demonstrated a clinical and endoscopic benefit in the short-term treatment of active ulcerative colitis, with a comparable safety profile to placebo. Future RCTs are required to standardize study protocols and examine data on maintenance therapy.
BACKGROUND: Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is a novel management strategy for ulcerative colitis (UC). However, its effectiveness remains controversial. This study sought to assess the effectiveness of FMT in the treatment of active UC by performing a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases from their inception to December 2021. RCTs that recruited patients with active UC and treated them with FMT, a placebo or a suitable comparator were included in the meta-analysis. PICOS: Patients, active UC; Intervention, FMT; Control, placebo or a suitable comparator; Outcomes, remission rate; Studies, RCTs. The risk of bias assessment was performed with Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (version 2). Meta-analyses of risk ratios (RRs) were performed to estimate the differences in remission rates and the risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) between the FMT-treated and control patients.
RESULTS: A total of 9 RCTs comprising 425 UC patients (213 FMT and 212 control) were included in the meta-analysis. The risk of bias was low in these RCTs. Clinical remission was observed in 86 of the 213 patients in the FMT groups and 47 of the 212 patients in the control groups [RR: 1.84; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.37, 2.47; P<0.0001]. Clinical remission was better when the FMT delivery route was via the lower gut, the FMT dose was >300 grams, and the fecal specimen from multiple donors. Endoscopic remission (observed in 7 RCTs) was achieved in 33 of the 195 FMT-treated patients compared to 17 of the 194 control patients (RR: 1.94; 95% CI: 1.14, 3.31; P=0.01). SAEs were reported in 22 of the 213 FMT-treated patients but only 11 of the 212 control patients (RR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.03, 4.09; P=0.04).
DISCUSSION: FMT is an effective treatment for patients with active UC. Significantly higher clinical and endoscopic remission rates are observed with FMT than with control treatments. However, FMT may cause a significantly higher incidence of SAEs than control treatments. Future studies should delineate the effects of donor selection, dosage, delivery route, and antibiotic pretreatment and should evaluate the safety profile of FMT.
Aim. Increasing evidence supports the role of the gut microbiota in the etiology of ulcerative colitis (UC). Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is a highly effective treatment against recurrent Clostridium difficile infection; however, its efficacy in UC is still controversial. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FMT for treatment of active UC. Methods. We searched Cochrane, Medline, Web of Science, and Embase from inception to February 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults with active UC, which compared FMT with controls, were eligible. The primary outcome was combined clinical remission with endoscopic remission/response. Secondary outcomes included clinical remission, endoscopic remission, and serious adverse events. Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) is reported. Results. Five RCTs with 292 participants were eligible for inclusion. When data were pooled for all patients, FMT was associated with a higher combined clinical remission with endoscopic remission/response; the RR of combined outcome not achieving after FMT vs. control was 0.79 (95% CI 0.70-0.88). FMT delivered via lower gastrointestinal route was superior to upper gastrointestinal route with regard to combined clinical remission with endoscopic remission/response (RR=0.79, 95% CI 0.70-0.89). FMT with pooled donor stool (RR=0.69, 95% CI 0.56-0.85) and higher frequency of administration (RR=0.76, 95% CI 0.62-0.93) may be more effective with regard to clinical remission. There was no statistically significant difference in serious adverse events with FMT compared with controls (RR=0.98, 95% CI 0.93-1.03). Conclusion. FMT shows a promising perspective with comparable safety and favorable clinical efficacy for the treatment of active UC in the short term. However, further larger, more rigorously conducted RCTs of FMT in UC are still needed in order to resolve the controversial questions.
BACKGROUND: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is a chronic, recurrent and destructive disease of the gastrointestinal tract. Faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is a therapeutic measure in which faecal microbiota from healthy people is transplanted into patients.
AIM: To systematically evaluate the safety and effectiveness of treating UC with different modes of FMT.
METHODS: Seven databases were searched by two independent researchers and studies related to randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis.
RESULTS: Seven studies on UC involving 431 patients were included in the analysis. The results showed that FMT had better efficacy than placebo (OR = 2.29, 95% CI 1.48-3.53, P = 0.0002). Subgroup analyses of influencing factors showed that frozen faeces from multiple donors delivered via the lower gastrointestinal tract had a better curative effect than placebo (OR = 2.76, 95% CI 1.59-4.79, P = 0.0003; OR = 2.93, 95% CI 1.67-5.71, P = 0.0002; and OR = 2.70, 95% CI 1.67-4.37, P < 0.0001); the difference in efficacy between mixed faeces from a single donor transplanted through the upper gastrointestinal tract and placebo was not significant(P = 0.05, P = 0.09 and P = 0.98). The analysis of side effects showed no significant difference between FMT and placebo (P = 0.43).
CONCLUSIONS: It may be safe and effective to transplant frozen faeces from multiple donors through the lower gastrointestinal tract to treat UC.
BACKGROUND: Fecal microbiota transplantation is an effective treatment for many gastrointestinal diseases, such as Clostridium difficile infection and inflammatory bowel disease, especially ulcerative colitis. Changes in colonic microflora may play an important role in the pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis, and improvements in the intestinal microflora may relieve the disease. Fecal bacterial transplants and oral probiotics are becoming important ways to relieve active ulcerative colitis.
PURPOSE: This systematic review with meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of basic treatment combined with fecal microbiota transplantation or mixed probiotics therapy in relieving mild to moderate ulcerative colitis.
METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane libraries (updated September 2019) were searched to identify randomized, placebo-controlled, or head-to-head trials assessing fecal microbiota transplantation or probiotic VSL#3 as induction therapy in active ulcerative colitis. We analyze data using the R program to obtain evidence of direct comparison and to generate intermediate variables for indirect treatment comparisons.
RESULTS: Seven randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials were used as the sources of the induction data. All treatments were superior to placebo. In terms of clinical remission and clinical response to active ulcerative colitis, direct comparisons showed fecal microbiota transplantation (OR = 3.47, 95% CI = 1.93-6.25) (OR = 2.48, 95% CI = 1.18-5.21) and mixed probiotics VSL#3 (OR = 2.40, 95% CI = 1.49-3.88) (OR = 3.09, 95% CI = 1.53-6.25) to have better effects than the placebo. Indirect comparison showed fecal microbiota transplantation and probiotic VSL#3 did not reach statistical significance either in clinical remission (RR = 1.20, 95% CI = 0.70-2.06) or clinical response (RR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.62-1.45). In terms of safety, fecal microbiota transplantation (OR = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.51-2.61) and VSL #3 (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.33-2.49) showed no statistically significant increase in adverse events compared with the control group. In terms of serious adverse events, there was no statistical difference between the fecal microbiota transplantation group and the control group (OR = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.46-3.57). The probiotics VSL#3 seems more safer than fecal microbiota transplantation, because serious adverse events were not reported in the VSL#3 articles.
CONCLUSIONS: Fecal microbiota transplantation or mixed probiotics VSL#3 achieved good results in clinical remission and clinical response in active ulcerative colitis, and there was no increased risk of adverse reactions. There was no statistical difference between the therapeutic effect of fecal microbiota transplantation and that of mixed probiotics VSL#3. However, the use of fecal microbiota transplantation and probiotics still has many unresolved problems in clinical applications, and more randomized controlled trials are required to confirm its efficacy.
BACKGROUND: Changes in the colonic microbiota may play a role in the pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis (UC) and restoration of healthy gut microbiota may ameliorate disease. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) as a treatment for active UC.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted to identify high-quality studies of FMT as a treatment for patients with UC. The primary outcome was combined clinical remission and endoscopic remission or response. Secondary outcomes included clinical remission, endoscopic remission, and serious adverse events. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are reported.
RESULTS: Overall, 4 studies with 277 participants were eligible for inclusion. Among 4 randomized controlled trials, FMT was associated with higher combined clinical and endoscopic remission compared with placebo (risk ratio UC not in remission was 0.80; 95% CI: 0.71-0.89) with a number needed to treat of 5 (95% CI: 4-10). There was no statistically significant increase in serious adverse events with FMT compared with controls (risk ratio adverse event was 1.4; 95% CI: 0.55-3.58).
CONCLUSIONS: Among randomized controlled trials, short-term use of FMT shows promise as a treatment to induce remission in active UC based on the efficacy and safety observed. However, there remain many unanswered questions that require further research before FMT can be considered for use in clinical practice.
Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has been investigated as a treatment option for patients with inflammatory bowel disease with controversial results.We sought to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the benefit of FMT in patients with ulcerative colitis.
METHODS:
Double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including adult patients with active ulcerative colitis who received either FMT or placebo were eligible for inclusion. Outcomes of interest included the rate of combined clinical and endoscopic remission, endoscopic remission or response, clinical remission or response, and specific adverse events. The results were pooled together using Reviewer Manager 5.4 software. Publication bias was assessed using the Egger's test.
RESULTS:
Six RCTs involving 324 patients were included. Our findings demonstrate that compared with placebo, FMT has significant benefit in inducing combined clinical and endoscopic remission (odds ratio, 4.11; 95% confidence interval, 2.19-7.72; P < .0001). Subgroup analyses of influencing factors showed no differences between pooled or single stool donors (P = .71), fresh or frozen FMT (P = .35), and different routes or frequencies of delivery (P = .80 and .48, respectively). Pre-FMT antibiotics, bowel lavage, concomitant biologic therapy, and topical rectal therapy did not affect combined remission rates (P values of .47, .38, .28, and .40, respectively). Clinical remission or response and endoscopic remission or response were significantly higher in patients who received FMT compared with placebo (P < .05) without any differences in serious or specific adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS:
FMT demonstrated a clinical and endoscopic benefit in the short-term treatment of active ulcerative colitis, with a comparable safety profile to placebo. Future RCTs are required to standardize study protocols and examine data on maintenance therapy.
