BMC gastroenterology · 2023
Colonic distribution of FMT by different enema procedures compared to colonoscopy - proof of concept study using contrast fluid.
Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Skjevling Linn Kallbekken, Hanssen Hege Marie, Valle Per Christian, Goll Rasmus, Juul Frederik Emil, Arlov Øystein, Johnsen Peter Holger
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has become an important treatment method in recurrent Clostridioides difficile infections and is under investigation as a treatment for several other diseases. FMT's mechanism of action is assumed to be through alterations of the colon microbiota. FMT can be delivered by several methods, but few studies have directly compared how FMT is distributed in the colon by different methods. Specifically, the proximal distribution of FMT delivered by enema is unknown.
METHODS: In eight participants, we administered contrast fluid (CF) with viscosity similar to an FMT in a crossover study design. First, CF was administered by colonoscopy, followed by an abdominal X-ray to visualize the CF distribution. Next, after four to eight weeks, participants were given CF, but as an enema, followed by a positioning procedure. X-rays were obtained before (enema ÷) and after (enema +) the positioning procedure.
CONCLUSION: Proportion of participants with CF in cecum were 100% after colonoscopy, 50% after enema + and 38% after enema ÷. In the transverse colon, proportions were 100% (colonoscopy), 88% (enema +) and 63% (enema ÷). There were no adverse events.
INTERPRETATION: This study shows proof of concept for the distribution of FMT to proximal colon when delivered by enema. A positioning procedure after the enema slightly improves the proximal distribution. However, colonoscopy is the only method that ensures delivery to the cecum. Studies are needed to see if FMT colon distribution correlates with treatment effectiveness.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05121285) (16/11/2021).
METHODS: In eight participants, we administered contrast fluid (CF) with viscosity similar to an FMT in a crossover study design. First, CF was administered by colonoscopy, followed by an abdominal X-ray to visualize the CF distribution. Next, after four to eight weeks, participants were given CF, but as an enema, followed by a positioning procedure. X-rays were obtained before (enema ÷) and after (enema +) the positioning procedure.
CONCLUSION: Proportion of participants with CF in cecum were 100% after colonoscopy, 50% after enema + and 38% after enema ÷. In the transverse colon, proportions were 100% (colonoscopy), 88% (enema +) and 63% (enema ÷). There were no adverse events.
INTERPRETATION: This study shows proof of concept for the distribution of FMT to proximal colon when delivered by enema. A positioning procedure after the enema slightly improves the proximal distribution. However, colonoscopy is the only method that ensures delivery to the cecum. Studies are needed to see if FMT colon distribution correlates with treatment effectiveness.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05121285) (16/11/2021).