Evidence Hub

Association of oral vancomycin prophylaxis with Clostridium difficile infection in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Amir M, Kamal K, Jahangir MA, Faiz M, Mushahid Z, Khokhar MM, Wasim A, Sarmad M et al.

Medicine, 2026

957 participants

Abstract

Background: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) occurs in up to 30% of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients and remains a significant cause of infectious diarrhea. This meta-analysis evaluated the association of oral vancomycin prophylaxis (OVP) with CDI prevention after HSCT.

Methods: We conducted a literature search of PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar for articles from inception to July 2025 that compared the safety and efficacy of OVP for CDI in post-HSCT patients. Statistical analysis of the extracted data was conducted using Review Manager 5.4. The odds ratio for dichotomous variables and the mean difference for continuous variables were analyzed along with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. A random-effects model was applied when heterogeneity was high (I2 ≥ 50%), and a fixed-effect model was applied when heterogeneity was low (I2 ≤ 50%).

Results: This meta-analysis included 5 studies comprising 957 patients, with 490 (51.2%) receiving OVP and 467 (48.8%) not receiving OVP (no OVP). OVP was significantly associated with a reduced incidence of CDI during hospitalization (P < .00001). Although a lower overall incidence of CDI (hospitalization plus 180-day follow-up) was observed in the OVP group, the result was not statistically significant (P = .06). A leave-one-out analysis was performed to establish a significant association (P = .04). In the OVP group, higher rates of grade 2 to 4 acute graft-versus-host disease (P = .13) and lower…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 957 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free