ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2026
Gut microbiota and constipation: from causal evidence to therapeutic strategies-a state-of-the-art narrative review.
Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Constipation is a common functional disorder of the gastrointestinal tract with a global prevalence of approximately 10-20%, which seriously affects patients' quality of life and imposes a heavy socioeconomic burden. In recent years, the role of the gut microbiota in the pathogenesis of constipation has received increasing attention, particularly in the context of the brain-gut axis theory. In this narrative review, we critically examine the research literature on constipation and intestinal microecology published over the past decade, focusing on four aspects: (1) the characteristics of the gut microbiota in patients with constipation, including changes in microbial diversity, alterations in the abundance of specific taxa, and differences across constipation subtypes; (2) Mendelian randomization studies that provide genetic-level evidence consistent with the hypothesis that certain microbiota alterations may precede constipation rather than merely result from it; (3) mechanisms of microbiota-host interactions mediated by the brain-gut axis, with an emphasis on neural, metabolic and immune pathways; and (4) microbiota-based intervention strategies (probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, postbiotics and fecal microbiota transplantation) and their clinical evidence. Our findings suggest that specific microbiota alterations may contribute to constipation pathophysiology and the promise of personalized, microbiome-based therapies. Although microbiota-based interventions show potential therapeutic value in selected patients, current evidence is limited by substantial heterogeneity in study design, small sample sizes, inconsistent microbiome signatures, and limited long-term safety data. High-quality evidence from large, well-designed RCTs is lacking for most interventions, and findings from low-certainty studies (e.g., conference abstracts, animal experiments, small uncontrolled trials) should be interpreted as preliminary and hypothesis-generating rather than conclusive. Therefore, microbiota-targeted therapies should currently be considered exploratory or adjunctive rather than established standard treatments for constipation. Future progress will require standardized methodologies, mechanistic validation studies, and phenotype-stratified clinical trials to support translation toward precision microbiome-based medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.