Consensus report: faecal microbiota transfer - clinical applications and procedures

BACKGROUND

Faecal microbiota transplantation or transfer (FMT) aims at replacing or reinforcing the gut microbiota of a patient with the microbiota from a healthy donor. Not many controlled or randomised studies have been published evaluating the use of FMT for other diseases than Clostridium difficile infection, making it difficult for clinicians to decide on a suitable indication.

AIM

To provide an expert consensus on current clinical indications, applications and methodological aspects of FMT.

METHODS

Well-acknowledged experts from various countries in Europe have contributed to this article. After literature review, consensus has been achieved by repetitive circulation of the statements and the full manuscript among all authors with intermittent adaptation to comments (using a modified Delphi process). Levels of evidence and agreement were rated according to the GRADE system. Consensus was defined a priori as agreement by at least 75% of the authors.

RESULTS

Key recommendations include the use of FMT in recurrent C. difficile infection characterised by at least two previous standard treatments without persistent cure, as well as its consideration in severe and severe-complicated C. difficile infection as an alternative to total colectomy in case of early failure of antimicrobial therapy. FMT in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and metabolic syndrome should only be performed in research settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Faecal microbiota transplantation or transfer is a promising treatment for a variety of diseases in which the intestinal microbiota is disturbed. For indications other than C. difficile infection, more evidence is needed before more concrete recommendations can be made.

Low prevalence of Blastocystis sp. in active ulcerative colitis patients

Ulcerative colitis (UC) is thought to originate from a disbalance in the interplay between the gut microbiota and the innate and adaptive immune system. Apart from the bacterial microbiota, there might be other organisms, such as parasites or viruses, that could play a role in the aetiology of UC. The primary objective of this study was to compare the prevalence of Blastocystis sp. in a cohort of patients with active UC and compare that to the prevalence in healthy controls. We studied patients with active UC confirmed by endoscopy included in a randomised prospective trial on the faecal transplantation for UC. A cohort of healthy subjects who served as donors in randomised trials on faecal transplantation were controls. Healthy subjects did not have gastrointestinal symptoms and were extensively screened for infectious diseases by a screenings questionnaire, extensive serologic assessment for viruses and stool analysis. Potential parasitic infections such as Blastocystis were diagnosed with the triple faeces test (TFT). The prevalence of Blastocystis sp. were compared between groups by Chi-square testing. A total of 168 subjects were included, of whom 45 had active UC [median age 39.0 years, interquartile range (IQR) 32.5–49.0, 49 % male] and 123 were healthy subjects (median age 27 years, IQR 22.0–37.0, 54 % male). Blastocystis sp. was present in the faeces of 40/123 (32.5 %) healthy subjects and 6/45 (13.3 %) UC patients (p = 0.014). Infection with Blastocystis is significantly less frequent in UC patients as compared to healthy controls.