Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Singh, Tanveer
• Bedi, Prabhjot
• Bumrah, Karandeep
• Gandhi, Darshan
• Arora, Tanureet
• Verma, Nikita
• Schleicher, Mary
• Rai, Manoj P
• Garg, Rajat
• Verma, Beni
• Sanaka, Madhusudhan R

Titel

Fecal Microbiota Transplantation and Medical Therapy for Clostridium difficile Infection : Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Ist Teil von

• Journal of clinical gastroenterology, 2022-11, Vol.56 (10), p.881-888

Ort / Verlag

United States

Erscheinungsjahr

2022

Quelle

MEDLINE

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• The aim was to assess the effectiveness of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) against medical therapy (MT). FMT has shown good outcomes in the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of FMT versus MT for CDI. We performed a comprehensive search to identify randomized controlled trials comparing FMT against MT in patients with CDI. Outcomes of interest were clinical cure as determined by the resolution of diarrhea and/or negative C. difficile testing. Primary CDI is defined as the first episode of CDI confirmed endoscopically or by laboratory analysis. Recurrent C. difficile infection (RCDI) is defined as laboratory or endoscopically confirmed episode of CDI after at least 1 course of approved antibiotic regimen. A total of 7 studies with 238 patients were included in meta-analysis. Compared with MT, FMT did not have a statistically significant difference for clinical cure of combined primary and RCDI after first session [risk ratio (RR): 1.52, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.90, 2.58; P =0.12; I2 =77%] and multiple sessions of FMT (RR: 1.68; CI: 0.96, 2.94; P =0.07; I2 =82%). On subgroup analysis, FMT has statistically higher rate of response than MT (RR: 2.41; CI: 1.20, 4.83; I2 =78%) for RCDI. However, for primary CDI there is no statistically significant difference between FMT and MT (RR: 1.00; CI: 0.72, 1.39; I2 =0%). As per our analysis, FMT should not be utilized for every patient with CDI. It is more effective in RCDI, but the results were not significant in patients with primary CDI.