Wu · Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology 2022 · systematic review and meta-analysis · n=7 RCTs (472 participants)

Efficacy of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Cited 69 times in the scientific literature.

Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PubMed 35295757 · doi:10.3389/fcimb.2022.827395 · record verified 2026-08-28

What was done

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register were searched through September 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) with placebo in adults with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Dichotomous response data were pooled for relative risk (RR) of symptoms not improving and adverse events. Continuous data were pooled for mean difference in IBS-Quality of Life (IBS-QoL) at 12 weeks. GRADE was used to assess evidence certainty.

What was found

Seven RCTs with 472 patients were included. At 12 weeks, FMT did not significantly improve global IBS symptoms compared to placebo (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.31) with high heterogeneity (I² = 87%). Subgroup analyses by route found FMT superior to placebo via colonoscopy (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.96) or gastroscope (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.99), but inferior via oral capsules (RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.35). IBS-QoL improved significantly at 12 weeks (mean difference 9.39, 95% CI 3.86 to 14.91). Adverse events did not differ significantly (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.47). At 1-year follow-up, FMT did not significantly improve global symptoms (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.12). GRADE certainty was rated as very low.

Why it matters

FMT does not show overall efficacy for global IBS symptoms compared to placebo, though administration route appears to alter treatment response.

Limits

The total sample size was small across only 7 RCTs (n = 472), heterogeneity was high (I² = 87%), findings diverged substantially by delivery route, and the GRADE quality of evidence was very low.

Cited by