BACKGROUND Numerous studies have assessed the efficacy and safety of fecal microbiota transplantation(FMT)as a therapy for ulcerative colitis(UC).However,the treatment processes and outcomes of these studies vary.AIM ...BACKGROUND Numerous studies have assessed the efficacy and safety of fecal microbiota transplantation(FMT)as a therapy for ulcerative colitis(UC).However,the treatment processes and outcomes of these studies vary.AIM To evaluate the efficacy and safety of FMT for treating UC by conducting a systematic meta-analysis.METHODS The inclusion criteria involved reports of adult patients with UC treated with FMT,while studies that did not report clinical outcomes or that included patients with infection were excluded.Clinical remission(CR)and endoscopic remission(ER)were the primary and secondary outcomes,respectively.RESULTS We included nine studies retrieved from five electronic databases.The FMT group had better CR than the control group[relative risk(RR)=1.53;95%confidence interval(CI):1.19-1.94;P<0.0008].ER was statistically significantly different between the two groups(RR=2.80;95%CI:1.93-4.05;P<0.00001).Adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups.CONCLUSION FMT demonstrates favorable performance and safety;however,well-designed randomized clinical trials are still needed before the widespread use of FMT can be recommended.Furthermore,standardizing the FMT process is urgently needed for improved safety and efficacy.展开更多
基金the Tianjin Health Science and Technology Project,No.TJWJ2021MS011.
文摘BACKGROUND Numerous studies have assessed the efficacy and safety of fecal microbiota transplantation(FMT)as a therapy for ulcerative colitis(UC).However,the treatment processes and outcomes of these studies vary.AIM To evaluate the efficacy and safety of FMT for treating UC by conducting a systematic meta-analysis.METHODS The inclusion criteria involved reports of adult patients with UC treated with FMT,while studies that did not report clinical outcomes or that included patients with infection were excluded.Clinical remission(CR)and endoscopic remission(ER)were the primary and secondary outcomes,respectively.RESULTS We included nine studies retrieved from five electronic databases.The FMT group had better CR than the control group[relative risk(RR)=1.53;95%confidence interval(CI):1.19-1.94;P<0.0008].ER was statistically significantly different between the two groups(RR=2.80;95%CI:1.93-4.05;P<0.00001).Adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups.CONCLUSION FMT demonstrates favorable performance and safety;however,well-designed randomized clinical trials are still needed before the widespread use of FMT can be recommended.Furthermore,standardizing the FMT process is urgently needed for improved safety and efficacy.
