4.6 Review

Bacteriophage Treatment: Critical Evaluation of Its Application on World Health Organization Priority Pathogens

Journal

VIRUSES-BASEL
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v13010051

Keywords

phage therapy; S; aureus; K; pneumoniae; P; aeruginosa; E; faecalis; combination therapy

Categories

Funding

  1. Qatar National Research Fund (QNRF), Doha, Qatar [NPRP11S-1214-170101]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bacteriophages are shown to be effective against Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterococcus faecalis infections with high efficacy and safety. Further studies on phage therapy, host identification, and regulatory processes are needed to evaluate and advance their clinical use.
Bacteriophages represent an effective, natural, and safe strategy against bacterial infections. Multiple studies have assessed phage therapy's efficacy and safety as an alternative approach to combat the emergence of multi drug-resistant pathogens. This systematic review critically evaluates and summarizes published articles on phages as a treatment option for Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterococcus faecalis infection models. It also illustrates appropriate phage selection criteria, as well as recommendations for successful therapy. Published studies included in this review were identified through EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science databases and were published in the years between 2010 to 2020. Among 1082 identified articles, 29 studies were selected using specific inclusion and exclusion criteria and evaluated. Most studies (93.1%) showed high efficacy and safety for the tested phages, and a few studies also examined the effect of phage therapy combined with antibiotics (17.2%) and resistance development (27.6%). Further clinical studies, phage host identification, and regulatory processes are required to evaluate phage therapy's safety and efficacy and advance their clinical use.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available