Skip to main content
. 2017 Sep 5;35(11):1123–1140. doi: 10.1007/s40273-017-0540-2

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Number and percentage of EEs reporting positive and negative cost-effectiveness results for each treatment for CDI. CDI Clostridium difficile infection, EE economic evaluation, FDX fidaxomicin, FMT faecal microbiota transplant, MTZ metronidazole, VNC vancomycin. aNumber of EEs is >27, as two EEs reported >1 treatment to be cost-effective [65]. bNote that cost-effectiveness thresholds vary according to EE and region. cFMT was evaluated in six EEs only, but there were multiple comparisons with other treatments in some EEs (also note that FMT was not included as a search term in the systematic literature review). dEE compared FDX with ‘no FDX’ strategy (VNC or MTZ) [37]. One EE was not included in the figure as the cost-effectiveness conclusion was unclear from the publication [29]