Background: Diabetic foot ulcers are a common complication of poorly controlled diabetes and often become infected, termed diabetic foot infection. There have been numerous studies of the microbiology of diabetic foot infection but no meta-analysis has provided a global overview of these data. This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the prevalence of bacteria isolated from diabetic foot infections using studies of any design which reported diabetic foot infection culture results. Methods: The Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science and BIOSIS electronic databases were searched for studies published up to 2019 which contained microbiological culture results from at least 10 diabetic foot infection patients. Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and extracted the data. The main outcome was the prevalence of each bacterial genera or species. Results: A total of 112 studies were included, representing 16,159 patients from which 22,198 microbial isolates were obtained. The organism most commonly identified was Staphylococcus aureus, of which 18.0% (95% CI 13.8–22.6%; I² = 93.8% [93.0–94.5%]) was MRSA. Other highly prevalent organisms were Pseudomonas spp., E. coli and Enterococcus spp. A correlation was identified between Gross National Income and the prevalence of Gram positive or negative organisms in diabetic foot infections. Conclusion: The microbiology of diabetic foot infections is diverse, but S. aureus predominates. The correlation between the prevalence of Gram positive and negative organisms and Gross National Income could reflect differences in healthcare provision and sanitation. This meta-analysis has synthesised multiple datasets to provide a global overview of the microbiology of diabetic foot infections that will help direct the development of novel therapeutics.

Trials of phage therapy have not consistently reported efficacy. This contrasts with promising efficacy rates from a sizeable and compelling body of observational literature. This systematic review explores the reasons why many phage trials have not demonstrated efficacy. Four electronic databases were systematically searched for safety and/or efficacy trials of phage therapy. Sixteen trials of phage therapy were included, in which 378 patients received phage. These were divided into historical (pre-2000; N = 3; n = 76) and modern (post-2000; N = 13; n = 302) trials. All 13 modern trials concluded that phage therapy was safe. Six of the 13 modern trials were exclusively safety trials. Seven modern trials investigated both safety and efficacy; efficacy was observed in two. Two of three historical trials did not comment on safety, while adverse effects in the third likely reflected the use of phage preparations contaminated with bacterial debris. None of the historical trials contained evidence of efficacy. The evidence from trials is that phage therapy is safe. For efficacy to be observed a therapeutic amount of the right phage(s) must be delivered to the right place to treat infections containing enough susceptible bacterial cells. Trials that have not demonstrated efficacy have not fulfilled one or more elements of this principle.

Diabetic patients have multiple risk factors for colonisation with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), a nosocomial pathogen associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the prevalence of MRSA among diabetic patients.

Infected diabetic foot ulcers can be difficult to treat and, despite appropriate antibiotic therapy, some diabetic foot infections (DFIs) require amputation. Bacteriophages (phages) are viruses that infect and kill bacteria. Phage therapy has been repeatedly used to successfully treat DFIs and other chronic wounds. This article reports the provision of topical adjunctive anti-staphylococcal phage therapy to 10 patients with DFI at high risk of amputation at two UK hospitals as part of clinical care; tolerability and efficacy were clinically assessed. The opinion of the experienced clinical teams caring for these patients was that 9 of the 10 patients appeared to benefit from adjunctive phage therapy. No adverse effects were reported by clinicians or patients. In 6 of 10 patients the clinical impression was that phage therapy facilitated clinical resolution of infection and limb salvage. Resolution of soft tissue infection was observed in a 7th patient but unresolved osteomyelitis required amputation. An 8th patient demonstrated eradication of Staphylococcus aureus from a polymicrobial infection and a 9th showed signs of clinical improvement before early cessation of phage therapy due to an unrelated event. One patient, with a weakly susceptible S aureus isolate, had no significant response. This report describes the largest application of phage therapy in the United Kingdom to date and the first application of phage therapy for DFI in the United Kingdom and offers subjective hints toward impressive tolerability and efficacy. Phage therapy has the potential to transform the prevention and treatment of DFIs.

Superficial bacterial infections, such as dermatological, burn wound and chronic wound/ulcer infections, place great human and financial burdens on health systems globally and are often complicated by antibiotic resistance. Bacteriophage (phage) therapy is a promising alternative antimicrobial strategy with a 100-year history of successful application. Here, we report a systematic review of the safety and efficacy of phage therapy for the treatment of superficial bacterial infections. Three electronic databases were systematically searched for articles that reported primary data about human phage therapy for dermatological, burn wound or chronic wound/ulcer infections secondary to commonly causative bacteria. Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and performed data extraction. Of the 27 eligible reports, eight contained data on burn wound infection (n = 156), 12 on chronic wound/ulcer infection (n = 327) and 10 on dermatological infections (n = 1096). Cautionary pooled efficacy estimates from the studies that clearly reported efficacy data showed clinical resolution or improvement in 77.5% (n = 111) of burn wound infections, 86.1% (n = 310) of chronic wound/ulcer infections and 94.14% (n = 734) of dermatological infections. Over half of the reports that commented on safety (n = 8/15), all published in or after 2002, did not express safety concerns. Seven early reports (1929–1987), described adverse effects consistent with the administration of raw phage lysate and co-administered bacterial debris or broth. This review strongly suggests that the use of purified phage to treat superficial bacterial infections can be highly effective and, by various routes of administration, is safe and without adverse effects.

Bacterial resistance to antibiotics has catalysed interest in alternative antimicrobial strategies. Bacteriophages (phages) are viruses of bacteria with a long history of successful therapeutic use. Phage therapy is a promising antibacterial strategy for infections with a biofilm component, including recalcitrant bone and joint infections, which have significant social, financial and human impacts. Here, we report a systematic review of the safety and efficacy of phage therapy for the treatment of bone and joint infections. Three electronic databases were systematically searched for articles that reported primary data about human phage therapy for bone and joint infections. Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and performed data extraction. Seventeen reports were eligible for inclusion in this review, representing the treatment of 277 patients. A cautionary, crude, efficacy estimate revealed that 93.1% (n = 258/277) achieved clinical resolution, 3.3% (n = 9/277) had improvement and 3.6% (n = 10/277) showed no improvement. Seven of the nine reports that directly commented on the safety of phage therapy did not express safety concerns. The adverse effects reported in the remaining two were not severe and were linked to the presence of contaminating endotoxins and pre-existing liver pathology in a patient treated with high-titre intravenous phage therapy. Three other reports, from 1940–1987, offered general comments on the safety of phage therapy and documented adverse effects consistent with endotoxin co-administration concomitant with the use of raw phage lysates. Together, the reports identified by this review suggest that appropriately purified phages represent a safe and highly efficacious treatment option for complex and intractable bone and joint infections.