dc.contributor.author | Skjevling, Linn | |
dc.contributor.author | Hanssen, Hege Marie | |
dc.contributor.author | Valle, Per Christian | |
dc.contributor.author | Goll, Rasmus | |
dc.contributor.author | Juul, Frederik Emil | |
dc.contributor.author | Arlov, Øystein | |
dc.contributor.author | Johnsen, Peter Holger | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-12-01T12:49:47Z | |
dc.date.available | 2023-12-01T12:49:47Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2023-10-23 | |
dc.description.abstract | 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.<p>
<p>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.
<p>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.
<p>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.
<p>Trial registration The study was retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05121285) (16/11/2021). | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Skjevling, Hanssen, Valle, Goll, Juul, Arlov, Johnsen. Colonic distribution of FMT by different enema procedures compared to colonoscopy – proof of concept study using contrast fluid. BMC Gastroenterology. 2023;23(1) | en_US |
dc.identifier.cristinID | FRIDAID 2193911 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1186/s12876-023-02979-x | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1471-230X | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10037/31905 | |
dc.language.iso | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | BMC | en_US |
dc.relation.journal | BMC Gastroenterology | |
dc.rights.accessRights | openAccess | en_US |
dc.rights.holder | Copyright 2023 The Author(s) | en_US |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 | en_US |
dc.rights | Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) | en_US |
dc.title | Colonic distribution of FMT by different enema procedures compared to colonoscopy – proof of concept study using contrast fluid | en_US |
dc.type.version | publishedVersion | en_US |
dc.type | Journal article | en_US |
dc.type | Tidsskriftartikkel | en_US |
dc.type | Peer reviewed | en_US |