ABSTRACT
Background@#Fecal microbiota transplantation against gut colonization using a multidrugresistant organism is a technique used to treat infections through normalizing the gut microbiota via fecal microbiota transplantation in patients with confirmed colonization by carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) or vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) based on a fecal culture test within the past one week. In this study, we aimed to determinethe safety and effectiveness of this technique. @*Methods@#The safety and effectiveness were assessed via a systematic review. A literature search was conducted using five Korean databases, such as KoreaMed, and international databases, including Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. @*Results@#Main results are described here. From the studies retrieved using the aforementioned search strategy, the remaining 581 studies were screened using the inclusion and exclusion criteria, resulting in the selection of nine studies for further consideration. In terms of safety, many studies reported deaths and adverse reactions associated with different causes. Fewer studies reported the rate of colonization; however, the effect of colony rate was inconsistent when compared to no treatment group. Additionally, none of the studies assessed the recurrence rate, a decrease in the prevalence of diseases related to infection by multidrugresistant bacteria, and the quality of life. @*Conclusion@#Fecal bacterial colonization for the decolonization of intestinal multidrugresistant bacteria was evaluated using a technique that requires further research as there is insufficient literature evidence to validate its safety and efficacy in treating infections through normalizing the intestinal flora of patients with confirmed colonization by CRE or VRE.
ABSTRACT
Background@#Fecal microbiota transplantation against gut colonization using a multidrugresistant organism is a technique used to treat infections through normalizing the gut microbiota via fecal microbiota transplantation in patients with confirmed colonization by carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) or vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) based on a fecal culture test within the past one week. In this study, we aimed to determinethe safety and effectiveness of this technique. @*Methods@#The safety and effectiveness were assessed via a systematic review. A literature search was conducted using five Korean databases, such as KoreaMed, and international databases, including Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. @*Results@#Main results are described here. From the studies retrieved using the aforementioned search strategy, the remaining 581 studies were screened using the inclusion and exclusion criteria, resulting in the selection of nine studies for further consideration. In terms of safety, many studies reported deaths and adverse reactions associated with different causes. Fewer studies reported the rate of colonization; however, the effect of colony rate was inconsistent when compared to no treatment group. Additionally, none of the studies assessed the recurrence rate, a decrease in the prevalence of diseases related to infection by multidrugresistant bacteria, and the quality of life. @*Conclusion@#Fecal bacterial colonization for the decolonization of intestinal multidrugresistant bacteria was evaluated using a technique that requires further research as there is insufficient literature evidence to validate its safety and efficacy in treating infections through normalizing the intestinal flora of patients with confirmed colonization by CRE or VRE.
ABSTRACT
Purpose@#Patients with respiratory failure associated with neurological dysfunction often require mechanical ventilator support, which poses increased economic burden and ventilator-associated complications. A diaphragm pacing system (DPS) is an implanted device that provides respiratory support for such patients. In this systematic review, we reviewed the literature to assess the safety and efficacy of DPS for patients with respiratory failure resulting from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) or cervical spinal cord injuries. @*Materials and Methods@#The following databases were searched from July 10 to July 30, 2018: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochran library, KoreaMed, Research Information Sharing Service, Korean studies Information Service System, Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information, and Korean Medical database. The abstracts and full texts of the searched articles were reviewed by two reviewers. @*Results@#The search keywords generated 197 articles: two randomized controlled trials, two case-control studies, and one case report involving patients with ALS; one cohort study, one case-control study, and two case reports involving patients with cervical spine injury; and one case report involving patients with both conditions were included. The primary outcome was safety profile (complications and adverse event) and efficacy (overall survival and sleep improvement). Complications and adverse events were more common in patients with ALS and spinal cord injury receiving DPS than in controls. Efficacy outcomes were inconsistent across ALS studies. @*Conclusion@#Based on safety and efficacy results, we do not support using DPS to manage respiratory failure in patients with ALS or cervical spine injury.