World journal of gastroenterology · 2015
Gastroenterologist perceptions of faecal microbiota transplantation.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Paramsothy Sudarshan, Walsh Alissa J, Borody Thomas, Samuel Douglas, van den Bogaerde Johan, Leong Rupert Wl, Connor Susan, Ng Watson, Mitchell Hazel M, Kaakoush Nadeem O, Kamm Michael A
Аннотация
AIM: To explore gastroenterologist perceptions towards and experience with faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT).
METHODS: A questionnaire survey consisting of 17 questions was created to assess gastroenterologists' attitude towards and experience with FMT. This was anonymously distributed in hard copy format amongst attendees at gastroenterology meetings in Australia between October 2013 and April 2014. Basic descriptive statistical analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Fifty-two clinicians participated. Twenty one percent had previously referred patients for FMT, 8% more than once. Ninety percent would refer patients with Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) for FMT if easily available, 37% for ulcerative colitis, 13% for Crohn's disease and 6% for irritable bowel syndrome. Six percent would not refer any indication, including recurrent CDI. Eighty-six percent would enroll patients in FMT clinical trials. Thirty-seven percent considered the optimal mode of FMT administration transcolonoscopic, 17% nasoduodenal, 13% enema and 8% oral capsule. The greatest concerns regarding FMT were: 42% lack of evidence, 12% infection risk, 10% non infectious adverse effects/lack of safety data, 10% aesthetic, 10% lack of efficacy, 4% disease exacerbation, and 2% inappropriate use; 6% had no concerns. Seventy seven percent believed there is a lack of accessibility while 52% had an interest in learning how to provide FMT. Only 6% offered FMT at their institution.
CONCLUSION: Despite general enthusiasm, most gastroenterologists have limited experience with, or access to, FMT. The greatest concerns were lack of supportive evidence and safety issues. However a significant proportion would refer indications other than CDI for FMT despite insufficient evidence. These data provide guidance on where education and training are required.
METHODS: A questionnaire survey consisting of 17 questions was created to assess gastroenterologists' attitude towards and experience with FMT. This was anonymously distributed in hard copy format amongst attendees at gastroenterology meetings in Australia between October 2013 and April 2014. Basic descriptive statistical analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Fifty-two clinicians participated. Twenty one percent had previously referred patients for FMT, 8% more than once. Ninety percent would refer patients with Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) for FMT if easily available, 37% for ulcerative colitis, 13% for Crohn's disease and 6% for irritable bowel syndrome. Six percent would not refer any indication, including recurrent CDI. Eighty-six percent would enroll patients in FMT clinical trials. Thirty-seven percent considered the optimal mode of FMT administration transcolonoscopic, 17% nasoduodenal, 13% enema and 8% oral capsule. The greatest concerns regarding FMT were: 42% lack of evidence, 12% infection risk, 10% non infectious adverse effects/lack of safety data, 10% aesthetic, 10% lack of efficacy, 4% disease exacerbation, and 2% inappropriate use; 6% had no concerns. Seventy seven percent believed there is a lack of accessibility while 52% had an interest in learning how to provide FMT. Only 6% offered FMT at their institution.
CONCLUSION: Despite general enthusiasm, most gastroenterologists have limited experience with, or access to, FMT. The greatest concerns were lack of supportive evidence and safety issues. However a significant proportion would refer indications other than CDI for FMT despite insufficient evidence. These data provide guidance on where education and training are required.