Nina Rågård, Simon Mark Dahl Baumwall, Sara Ellegaard Paaske, Mette Mejlby Hansen, Katrine Lundby Høyer, Susan Mikkelsen, Christian Erikstrup, Jens Frederik Dahlerup, Christian Lodberg Hvas
{"title":"Validation methods for encapsulated faecal microbiota transplantation: a scoping review.","authors":"Nina Rågård, Simon Mark Dahl Baumwall, Sara Ellegaard Paaske, Mette Mejlby Hansen, Katrine Lundby Høyer, Susan Mikkelsen, Christian Erikstrup, Jens Frederik Dahlerup, Christian Lodberg Hvas","doi":"10.1177/17562848251314820","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is increasingly used for diseases associated with a disrupted intestinal microbiome, mainly <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infection. Encapsulated FMT is a patient-friendly application method that improves accessibility and convenience. Capsule processing may be standardised, but validation protocols are warranted. This review aimed to describe published validation methods for encapsulated FMT. Original studies reporting using encapsulated faecal formulations were included, regardless of indication. Studies were excluded if they did not address processing and validation or used non-donor-derived content. We conducted a comprehensive scoping review, implementing a systematic search strategy in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science. Processing data and validation methods were registered during full-text analysis and combined to create an overview of approaches for assessing quality in encapsulated FMT processing. The searches identified 324 unique studies, of which 44 were included for data extraction and analysis. We identified eight validation covariables: donor selection, pre-processing, preservation, oxygen-sparing processing, microbial count, viability, engraftment and clinical effect outcomes, from which we constructed a model for quality assessment of encapsulated FMT that exhaustively categorised processing details and validation measures. Our model comprised three domains: (1) Processing (donor selection and processing protocol), (2) Content analysis (microbiota measures and dose measures) and (3) Clinical effect (engraftment and clinical outcomes). No studies presented a reproducible capsule protocol; their validation strategies were sparse and divergent. The validation of FMT capsules is heterogeneous, and processing requires relevant standardisation protocols, mainly focusing on capsule content. Future studies should report validation covariables to enable accurate comparative assessments of clinical effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":48770,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology","volume":"18 ","pages":"17562848251314820"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11806493/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17562848251314820","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is increasingly used for diseases associated with a disrupted intestinal microbiome, mainly Clostridioides difficile infection. Encapsulated FMT is a patient-friendly application method that improves accessibility and convenience. Capsule processing may be standardised, but validation protocols are warranted. This review aimed to describe published validation methods for encapsulated FMT. Original studies reporting using encapsulated faecal formulations were included, regardless of indication. Studies were excluded if they did not address processing and validation or used non-donor-derived content. We conducted a comprehensive scoping review, implementing a systematic search strategy in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science. Processing data and validation methods were registered during full-text analysis and combined to create an overview of approaches for assessing quality in encapsulated FMT processing. The searches identified 324 unique studies, of which 44 were included for data extraction and analysis. We identified eight validation covariables: donor selection, pre-processing, preservation, oxygen-sparing processing, microbial count, viability, engraftment and clinical effect outcomes, from which we constructed a model for quality assessment of encapsulated FMT that exhaustively categorised processing details and validation measures. Our model comprised three domains: (1) Processing (donor selection and processing protocol), (2) Content analysis (microbiota measures and dose measures) and (3) Clinical effect (engraftment and clinical outcomes). No studies presented a reproducible capsule protocol; their validation strategies were sparse and divergent. The validation of FMT capsules is heterogeneous, and processing requires relevant standardisation protocols, mainly focusing on capsule content. Future studies should report validation covariables to enable accurate comparative assessments of clinical effects.
期刊介绍:
Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology is an open access journal which delivers the highest quality peer-reviewed original research articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies in the medical treatment of gastrointestinal and hepatic disorders. The journal has a strong clinical and pharmacological focus and is aimed at an international audience of clinicians and researchers in gastroenterology and related disciplines, providing an online forum for rapid dissemination of recent research and perspectives in this area.
The editors welcome original research articles across all areas of gastroenterology and hepatology.
The journal publishes original research articles and review articles primarily. Original research manuscripts may include laboratory, animal or human/clinical studies – all phases. Letters to the Editor and Case Reports will also be considered.