Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Recurrent <i>Clostridium difficile</i> Infection in Patients With Multiple Comorbidities: Long-Term Safety and Efficacy Results From a Tertiary Care Community Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: infection (CDI) with fecal microbiota transplant (FMT) have been promising. However, there is debate regarding success of FMT in patients with comorbidities. METHODS: Electronic chart review was done to collect data on patients who underwent FMT from January 2015 to August 2017. Charts were analyzed in November 2018 with a median follow-up of 25.4 months (interquartile range 20 - 31 months). RESULTS: Twenty patients underwent FMT. The primary success rate at our institution was 90% and overall success rate was 100%. Six patients (43%) had FMT failure (two early and four late). CONCLUSIONS: This case series is a description of our center's initial experience with FMT for treatment of recurrent CDI. Our high success rate reiterates the efficacy and safety of FMT in this population including patients with comorbidities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".