Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Antibiotic treatment of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has a high failure rate. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has proven very effective in treating these recurrences. 

Objectives: To determine which method of fecal microbiota transplantation (upper or lower gastrointestinal) and which type of donor (a relative or unrelated) is superior.

Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of treatment protocols and outcomes in 22 patients with refractory or recurrent CDI who underwent FMT at two Israeli facilities. Each center used a different donor type, stool preparation and method of delivery. The Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center used unrelated fecal donors and frozen stool samples and delivered them primarily (92%) via the lower gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Shaare Zedek Medical Center used fresh donor stool of relatives and delivered them primarily (90%) via the upper GI tract.

Results: FMT had an overall 2 month cure rate of 89%. Patients treated with FMT that was executed through the lower GI tract recovered faster from the infection (1.6 ± 1.08 vs. 2.4 ± 1 days for the upper tract, P = 0.03). The results also showed that patients who received lower GI tract FMTs were more likely to be cured of CDI (100% vs. 75% for upper tract FMTs, P = 0.16). Five patients (22%) died of CDI/FMT-unrelated causes and two (10%) died of CDI/FMT-related causes during the study period.

Conclusions: Lower GI tract FMT is a safe and effective treatment for refractory and recurrent CDI, and yields quicker results than upper GI tract FMT. 

 

Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea is a problem most hospital-based physicians will face in their career. This review aims to refresh current knowledge with regard to Clostridium difficile infection and bring physicians up to date with the latest developments in the growing field of fecal microbiota transplantation, the benefits it offers, and the promise this and other developments hold for the future. 

Objectives: To characterize the demographic and clinical features of malaria acquired in Kenya, and to assess the adequacy of preventive measures.

Methods: Data were collected from investigation forms at the Ministry of Health. All persons who acquired malaria in Kenya during the years 1999–2001 were contacted by phone and questioned about use of chemoprophylaxis, attitudes towards malaria prevention, and disease course. Further information was extracted from hospital records.

Results: Kenya accounted for 30 of 169 (18%) cases of malaria imported to Israel, and was the leading source of malaria in the study period. Of 30 malaria cases imported from Kenya, 29 occurred after short (1–2 weeks) travel to holiday resorts in Mombassa. Average patient age was 43 ± 12 years, which is older than average for travelers to tropical countries. Only 10% of the patients were fully compliant with malaria chemoprophylaxis. The most common reason for non-compliance was the belief that short travel to a holiday resort carries a negligible risk of malaria. Only 3 of 13 patients (23%) who consulted their primary physician about post-travel fever were correctly diagnosed with malaria. Twenty percent of cases were severe enough to warrant admission to an intensive care unit; one case was fatal.

Conclusions: Measures aimed at preventing malaria and its severe sequelae among travelers should concentrate on increasing awareness of risks and compliance with malaria chemoprophylaxis.