ReviewArthroplasty (London, England)2026
Phage therapy in revision arthroplasty: State of the art and application protocols.
Review in Arthroplasty (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPeriprosthetic joint infections (PJI) pose significant clinical challenges due to biofilm formation and antibiotic resistance. Standard treatment often involves implant removal and prolonged antibiotic therapy. Novel strategies target intracellular pathogens and biofilm-associated bacteria, including liposomal antibiotics, antimicrobial peptides, and bacteriophage therapy. Bacteriophages offer specificity and minimal disruption to human microbiota but remain experimental in PJI. Combining phages with targeted antibiotics shows promising results in preclinical models, though further research is needed to confirm efficacy in human PJI and optimise delivery methods.
objectivesThis study updates the current evidence on the use of bacteriophages for patients with PJI, proposing guidelines for their clinical application.
methodPubMed was searched for articles containing phage therapy in revision arthroplasty. No additional filters or time constraints were used. All eligible studies were accessed by hand.
resultsA total of 39 studies (20 clinical, 19 reviews) on phage therapy for PJI were analysed, covering 56 patients. Of those, negative outcomes were only reported in five. Most studies involved elderly patients with periprosthetic infections of the knee or hip and showed high success rates when combined with antibiotics and surgery. Phage therapy was well tolerated, with only mild adverse effects, such as fever and reversible transaminitis, occurring predominantly with intravenous administration. Review articles reveal that despite promising outcomes, challenges remain, including a lack of standardisation, limited clinical data, and regulatory hurdles.
conclusionThis study highlights the potential of phage therapy for PJI, emphasising its high specificity, ability to target antibiotic-resistant bacteria, and capacity to disrupt biofilms, and provides a guideline for its clinical administration. Clinical adoption, however, remains limited by regulatory barriers, lack of standardised protocols, and insufficient trial data. Key steps for implementation include establishing regulatory frameworks, developing academic-industrial partnerships and reference centres, and identifying indications supported by controlled trials. With these in place, phage therapy could become a promising adjunct in managing periprosthetic joint infections. Video Abstract.
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.