Sheza Malik, Syed Arsalan Ahmed Naqvi, Abul Hasan Shadali, Hajra Khan, Michael Christof, Chengu Niu, David A Schwartz, Douglas G Adler
{"title":"Fecal Microbiota Transplantation (FMT) and Clinical Outcomes Among Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) Patients: An Umbrella Review.","authors":"Sheza Malik, Syed Arsalan Ahmed Naqvi, Abul Hasan Shadali, Hajra Khan, Michael Christof, Chengu Niu, David A Schwartz, Douglas G Adler","doi":"10.1007/s10620-025-08946-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) have shown inconsistent effectiveness of FMT among patients with IBD. This study aimed to appraise the evidence for clinically relevant outcomes with FMT in patients with IBD using published SRMAs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched major databases from inception through Nov 2023 to identify SRMAs assessing the effectiveness of FMT in patients with IBD. Primary outcomes included clinical remission, clinical response, endoscopic remission/response, a composite endpoint, and adverse effects. We included SRMAs investigating FMT's effect in patients with IBD using RCTs and observational studies data. Methodological quality and evidence certainty were assessed using AMSTAR 2 and GRADE.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 106 citations, 16 SRMAs were included with varying study sizes (2 to 60 primary studies) and participants (112 to 1169 per SRMA). Five SRMAs assessed FMT in IBD, while 11 focused on Ulcerative Colitis (UC). Seven SRMAs included RCTs only, and nine included both RCTs and observational studies. Methodological quality was critically low in 9 SRMAs (56%) and low in 7 studies (44%). FMT showed clinical remission benefit in all 16 SRMAs, with varying certainty: 3 high, 4 moderate, 4 low, and 5 very low. Endoscopic remission/response was reported in 5 meta-analyses on UC, with 1 high, 3 moderate, and 1 very low certainty. Combined clinical remission and endoscopic response were reported in 3 SRMAs on UC, with 1 low and 2 moderate certainty. Adverse events were reported in 6 SRMAs, with 1 high, 3 moderate, 1 low, and 1 very low certainty.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Current evidence shows potential benefits of FMT in IBD, particularly UC, supported by significant associations in 16 meta-analyses. However, poor methodological quality and variability in evidence certainty call for high-quality RCTs to strengthen the evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":11378,"journal":{"name":"Digestive Diseases and Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digestive Diseases and Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-025-08946-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background and aims: Recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) have shown inconsistent effectiveness of FMT among patients with IBD. This study aimed to appraise the evidence for clinically relevant outcomes with FMT in patients with IBD using published SRMAs.
Methods: We searched major databases from inception through Nov 2023 to identify SRMAs assessing the effectiveness of FMT in patients with IBD. Primary outcomes included clinical remission, clinical response, endoscopic remission/response, a composite endpoint, and adverse effects. We included SRMAs investigating FMT's effect in patients with IBD using RCTs and observational studies data. Methodological quality and evidence certainty were assessed using AMSTAR 2 and GRADE.
Results: Out of 106 citations, 16 SRMAs were included with varying study sizes (2 to 60 primary studies) and participants (112 to 1169 per SRMA). Five SRMAs assessed FMT in IBD, while 11 focused on Ulcerative Colitis (UC). Seven SRMAs included RCTs only, and nine included both RCTs and observational studies. Methodological quality was critically low in 9 SRMAs (56%) and low in 7 studies (44%). FMT showed clinical remission benefit in all 16 SRMAs, with varying certainty: 3 high, 4 moderate, 4 low, and 5 very low. Endoscopic remission/response was reported in 5 meta-analyses on UC, with 1 high, 3 moderate, and 1 very low certainty. Combined clinical remission and endoscopic response were reported in 3 SRMAs on UC, with 1 low and 2 moderate certainty. Adverse events were reported in 6 SRMAs, with 1 high, 3 moderate, 1 low, and 1 very low certainty.
Conclusion: Current evidence shows potential benefits of FMT in IBD, particularly UC, supported by significant associations in 16 meta-analyses. However, poor methodological quality and variability in evidence certainty call for high-quality RCTs to strengthen the evidence.
期刊介绍:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences publishes high-quality, peer-reviewed, original papers addressing aspects of basic/translational and clinical research in gastroenterology, hepatology, and related fields. This well-illustrated journal features comprehensive coverage of basic pathophysiology, new technological advances, and clinical breakthroughs; insights from prominent academicians and practitioners concerning new scientific developments and practical medical issues; and discussions focusing on the latest changes in local and worldwide social, economic, and governmental policies that affect the delivery of care within the disciplines of gastroenterology and hepatology.