Emil Ainsworth Jochumsen, Maja Skov Kragsnaes, Anna Christine Nilsson, Kristina Fruerlund Rasmussen, Torkell Ellingsen, Mie Agerbaek Juul, Jens Kjeldsen, Dorte Kinggaard Holm
{"title":"'Does this fecal microbiota transplant work?' Quality assurance of capsule based fecal microbiota transplant production.","authors":"Emil Ainsworth Jochumsen, Maja Skov Kragsnaes, Anna Christine Nilsson, Kristina Fruerlund Rasmussen, Torkell Ellingsen, Mie Agerbaek Juul, Jens Kjeldsen, Dorte Kinggaard Holm","doi":"10.1080/00365521.2024.2401460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Fecal Microbiota Transplant (FMT) is an effective treatment for recurring Clostridioides Difficile Infections (rCDI). FMT administered <i>via</i> oral capsules (caFMT) offers several practical advantages to conventional liquid FMT. We began using caFMT in 2021 imported from an external institution. Based on similar production methods, we began our own caFMT production in 2022. We aimed to evaluate the quality of our caFMT.</p><p><strong>Study design and methods: </strong>We created a database of all FMT treatments (<i>n</i> = 180) provided by our institution. Quality of all FMT was evaluated by treatment success rates. We compared our caFMT to the imported caFMT.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our caFMT yielded similar success rates compared to that of the imported caFMT, 65% (CI 95% 58-72%) and 72% (CI 95% 66-79%) respectively. FMT administered <i>via</i> colonoscopy had a significantly higher success rate, 79% (CI 95% 73-85%) than own our caFMT and other routes of administration. The combined success rate of treatments increased notably for all routes of administration when repeating FMT after prior failure.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The fact that our caFMT compared similarly to the imported caFMT was viewed as a success in terms of quality assurance. Our caFMT had a slightly lower success rates compared to data from other studies, but could be affected by several other factors than our FMT-production methods. A lower success rate of caFMT compared to FMT <i>via</i> colonoscopy is acceptable due to the practical advantages offed by caFMT. Our study serves as a practical example, proving that of the standardization of caFMT production is indeed viable.</p>","PeriodicalId":21461,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":"1234-1239"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2024.2401460","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Fecal Microbiota Transplant (FMT) is an effective treatment for recurring Clostridioides Difficile Infections (rCDI). FMT administered via oral capsules (caFMT) offers several practical advantages to conventional liquid FMT. We began using caFMT in 2021 imported from an external institution. Based on similar production methods, we began our own caFMT production in 2022. We aimed to evaluate the quality of our caFMT.
Study design and methods: We created a database of all FMT treatments (n = 180) provided by our institution. Quality of all FMT was evaluated by treatment success rates. We compared our caFMT to the imported caFMT.
Results: Our caFMT yielded similar success rates compared to that of the imported caFMT, 65% (CI 95% 58-72%) and 72% (CI 95% 66-79%) respectively. FMT administered via colonoscopy had a significantly higher success rate, 79% (CI 95% 73-85%) than own our caFMT and other routes of administration. The combined success rate of treatments increased notably for all routes of administration when repeating FMT after prior failure.
Discussion: The fact that our caFMT compared similarly to the imported caFMT was viewed as a success in terms of quality assurance. Our caFMT had a slightly lower success rates compared to data from other studies, but could be affected by several other factors than our FMT-production methods. A lower success rate of caFMT compared to FMT via colonoscopy is acceptable due to the practical advantages offed by caFMT. Our study serves as a practical example, proving that of the standardization of caFMT production is indeed viable.
期刊介绍:
The Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology is one of the most important journals for international medical research in gastroenterology and hepatology with international contributors, Editorial Board, and distribution