Rifaximin Versus Placebo for Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
13 affiliations
- 1Clinical Practice, Northern Border University, Rafha, SAU.
- 2Medicine, Cairo University, Giza, EGY.
- 3Internal Medicine, King Salman Hospital, Tabuk, SAU.
- 4Internal Medicine, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Qatif, SAU.
- 5Medicine, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, SAU.
- 6Internal Medicine, Almaarefa University, Riyadh, SAU.
- 7Medicine and Surgery, Batterjee Medical College, Jeddah, SAU.
- 8Medicine, King Khalid University, Khamis Mushayt, SAU.
- 9Internal Medicine, King Fahd Hospital, Madinah, SAU.
- 10Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, SAU.
- 11Medicine, Universitatea de Medicină și Farmacie din Craiova, Craiova, ROU.
- 12Medicine and Surgery, Umm Al-Qura University, Makkah, SAU.
- 13Precision Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, EGY.
Abstract
Rifaximin, a minimally absorbed broad-spectrum oral antibiotic, is used to target gut dysbiosis in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). However, conflicting trial data and methodological heterogeneity necessitate an updated, rigorous synthesis of its efficacy and safety profile. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rifaximin with placebo in adult patients with IBS, adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. The primary outcome was global symptom relief at the end of the treatment. Data were pooled using inverse-variance random-effects models with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) adjustment. Evidence robustness was evaluated using prediction intervals (PI), Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA), trim-and-fill algorithms for publication bias, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Nine RCTs (yielding 10 randomized comparisons due to one trial's a priori stratification by small intestinal bacterial overgrowth status) were included in this review. For the primary outcome (eight comparisons, N=2,056), rifaximin significantly improved global symptom relief compared to placebo (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.11; p=0.014), corresponding to a number needed to treat for benefit (NNTB) of 6. However, statistical heterogeneity was substantial (I²=59.5%), and the 95% PI crossed the line of no effect (0.89-2.67). The primary effect lost statistical significance upon the exclusion of high-risk-of-bias trials (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.95-2.27) and after adjusting for publication bias using the trim-and-fill method (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.93-2.01). The TSA indicated that the accrued information size remained inconclusive for a conservative 15% relative benefit. Rifaximin demonstrated no statistically detectable difference in adverse events compared to placebo, though this is accompanied by considerable uncertainty (Peto OR 0.89 (95% CI 0.65-1.22)). Rifaximin demonstrates a modest overall benefit for global IBS symptoms and an excellent safety profile; however, the certainty of evidence is very low. The apparent efficacy is highly fragile, driven largely by industry-funded trials, undermined by publication bias, and characterized by wide prediction intervals. Biomarker-guided stratification, such as testing for small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO), may be required to optimize patient selection in future independent trials.
Related
- Short-Term Effects of a Low-FODMAP Diet, Adapted NICE Dietary Advice, and Adapted NICE Dietary Advice Combined with Intermittent Fasting on Symptoms and Quality of Life in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Three-Arm, Non-Randomized Controlled Dietary Intervention Study
- Effects of different exercise types on visceral adipose tissue and glycemic parameters in adults with stage 1 cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
- Circulating Zonulin in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review of Conflicting Evidence and the Critical Impact of Assay Specificity
- Effect of vitamin D supplementation on metabolic syndrome parameters in adults: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials exploring the role of baseline vitamin D status and supplementation dose
- Gut relief revisited: plecanatide in chronic idiopathic constipation and irritable bowel syndrome with constipation — a systematic review and meta-analysis with GRADE assessment
BibTeX
@article{alqurain2026rifaximin,
title = {{Rifaximin Versus Placebo for Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.}},
author = {Aymen A Alqurain and Aya Abdelrahman and Ibrahim H Alzahib and Zainab A Alsinan and Ayah A Edrissy and Asmaa O Alkhalil and Obaeda A Jamor and Yazeed A Alahmari and Omar A Almohmmadi and Abdulaziz A Alrehaili and Shahad O Alsubhi and Abdullah F Alrawashdeh and Ali A Alghamdi and Ali S Metwaly},
journal = {Cureus},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.7759/cureus.116820},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42927267},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Rifaximin Versus Placebo for Irritable Bowel Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
AU - Aymen A Alqurain
AU - Aya Abdelrahman
AU - Ibrahim H Alzahib
AU - Zainab A Alsinan
AU - Ayah A Edrissy
AU - Asmaa O Alkhalil
AU - Obaeda A Jamor
AU - Yazeed A Alahmari
AU - Omar A Almohmmadi
AU - Abdulaziz A Alrehaili
AU - Shahad O Alsubhi
AU - Abdullah F Alrawashdeh
AU - Ali A Alghamdi
AU - Ali S Metwaly
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/24
JO - Cureus
DO - 10.7759/cureus.116820
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42927267
AB - Rifaximin, a minimally absorbed broad-spectrum oral antibiotic, is used to target gut dysbiosis in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). However, conflicting trial data and methodological heterogeneity necessitate an updated, rigorous synthesis of its efficacy and safety profile. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rifaximin with placebo in adult patients with IBS, adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. The primary outcome was global symptom relief at the end of the treatment. Data were pooled using inverse-variance random-effects models with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) adjustment. Evidence robustness was evaluated using prediction intervals (PI), Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA), trim-and-fill algorithms for publication bias, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Nine RCTs (yielding 10 randomized comparisons due to one trial's a priori stratification by small intestinal bacterial overgrowth status) were included in this review. For the primary outcome (eight comparisons, N=2,056), rifaximin significantly improved global symptom relief compared to placebo (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.11; p=0.014), corresponding to a number needed to treat for benefit (NNTB) of 6. However, statistical heterogeneity was substantial (I²=59.5%), and the 95% PI crossed the line of no effect (0.89-2.67). The primary effect lost statistical significance upon the exclusion of high-risk-of-bias trials (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.95-2.27) and after adjusting for publication bias using the trim-and-fill method (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.93-2.01). The TSA indicated that the accrued information size remained inconclusive for a conservative 15% relative benefit. Rifaximin demonstrated no statistically detectable difference in adverse events compared to placebo, though this is accompanied by considerable uncertainty (Peto OR 0.89 (95% CI 0.65-1.22)). Rifaximin demonstrates a modest overall benefit for global IBS symptoms and an excellent safety profile; however, the certainty of evidence is very low. The apparent efficacy is highly fragile, driven largely by industry-funded trials, undermined by publication bias, and characterized by wide prediction intervals. Biomarker-guided stratification, such as testing for small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO), may be required to optimize patient selection in future independent trials.
SN - 2168-8184
ER -