Is this bone infected or not? Differentiating neuro-osteoarthropathy from osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot

Osteomyelitis and Septic Arthritis of the Foot and Ankle: Imaging Update

Radiography is considered the first-line screening exam for clinically suspected osteomyelitis. However, additional evaluation is generally needed. MRI is the definitive diagnostic exam with high sensitivity and specificity combined with excellent anatomic definition. Gadolinium contrast can be useful to detect areas of devitalization before surgery. Bone marrow edema on fluid-sensitive images and low signal intensity on T1-weighted images in the presence of secondary MRI findings, including ulcer, sinus tract, and cellulitis with or without abscess are typical findings of osteomyelitis. If MRI is contraindicated, three phase bone scan can be used. Early diagnosis and treatment is essential.

Osteomyelitis and Septic Arthritis of the Foot and Ankle: Imaging Update

Radiography is considered the first-line screening exam for clinically suspected osteomyelitis. However, additional evaluation is generally needed. MRI is the definitive diagnostic exam with high sensitivity and specificity combined with excellent anatomic definition. Gadolinium contrast can be useful to detect areas of devitalization before surgery. Bone marrow edema on fluid-sensitive images and low signal intensity on T1-weighted images in the presence of secondary MRI findings, including ulcer, sinus tract, and cellulitis with or without abscess are typical findings of osteomyelitis. If MRI is contraindicated, three phase bone scan can be used. Early diagnosis and treatment is essential.

Diabetic foot infection - diagnosis and treatment

Diabetic foot (DF) is one of the most serious complications of diabetes, leading to high morbidity and mortality in patients with diabetes, significantly affecting their quality of life and placing a huge burden on the healthcare system. Diabetic foot infection (DFI) is a major factor in the non-healing of diabetic ulcerations of the lower limbs, increases the number of hospital admissions, prolongs their duration and is a frequent cause of increased number of amputations. The most serious form of foot infection is osteomyelitis. Management of infection in SDN includes proper diagnosis, including obtaining appropriate specimens for culture, indication of rational antimicrobial therapy or early surgical intervention, and provision of all other necessary wound care and overall patient care to prevent recurrence of DFI.

Musculoskeletal Trauma and Infection

MR is often the most definitive imaging for assessment of musculoskeletal trauma and infection. Although it is not possible to address all the intricacies of these complex topics in a single article, this review will attempt to provide a useful toolbox of skills by discussing several common clinical scenarios faced by emergency radiologists in interpretation of adult trauma and infection. These scenarios include MR assessment of hip and pelvic fracture, traumatic soft tissue injuries, septic arthritis, soft tissue infection, and osteomyelitis.

What Is the Best Method to Differentiate Acute Charcot Foot From Acute Infection?

RECOMMENDATION

Differentiation between acute Charcot neuroarthropathy (CN) and acute infection/osteomyelitis is complex and requires multiple (>1) diagnostic criteria. These criteria include an emphasis on the presence of neuropathy, history, and physical examination. The absence of skin wounds and resolution of swelling/erythema with elevation makes the likelihood of infection very low. In unclear cases, laboratory testing, histologic examination and culturing of bone specimens, scintigraphy, and imaging, especially magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), may be of benefit.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Moderate.

DELEGATE VOTE

Agree: 100%, Disagree: 0%, Abstain: 0% (Unanimous, Strongest Consensus).

Modern management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis. The when, how and why of conservative approaches

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) has long been considered a complex infection that is both difficult to diagnose and treat, and is associated with a high rate of relapse and limb loss. Areas covered: DFO can usually be diagnosed by a combination of clinical evaluation, serum inflammatory markers and plain X-ray. When the results of these procedures are negative or contradictory, advanced imaging tests or bone biopsy may be necessary. Staphylococcus aureus remains the most frequent microorganism isolated from bone specimens, but infection is often polymicrobial. Antibiotic therapy, preferably with oral agents guided by results of bone culture, for a duration of no more than six weeks, appears to be as safe and effective as surgery in cases of uncomplicated forefoot DFO. Surgery (which should be limb-sparing when possible) is always required for DFO accompanied by necrotizing fasciitis, deep abscess, gangrene or in cases not responding (either clinically or radiographically) to apparently appropriate antibiotic treatment. Expert commentary: Research in the past decade has improved diagnosis and treatment of DFO, and most cases can now be managed with a 'conservative' approach, defined as treatment either exclusively with antibiotics or with surgery removing as little bone and soft tissue as necessary.

Viability of permanent PMMA spacer with combined free fasciocutaneous tissue transfer for failed charcot reconstruction: A 38 month prospective case report

•

This case report demonstrates the long term viability and utility of the use of permanent cement spacers when combined with free tissue transfer for closure of complex diabetic foot wounds.

•

Charcot Neuroarthropathy often requires osseous reconstruction, which can be complicated with osteomyelitis and hardware infection.

•

This case is an example of a multidisciplinary team approach to limb salvage with successful long term outcome; a plantigrade stable functional foot in an ambulatory highly active patient.

•

Follow up time since initial intervention was 38 months.

Introduction

Charcot Neuroarthropathy is a complex lower extremity pathology which predisposes the afflicted limb to ulcerations, osteomyelitis, and risk of major amputation. Charcot Neuroarthropathy often requires osseous reconstruction, which can be complicated with osteomyelitis and hardware infection. When soft tissue and osseous deficits must be concomitantly addressed, the use of PMMA spacers can be combined with free tissue transfers.

Presentation of case

71 year old Caucasian male with Diabetic Charcot Neuroarthopathy underwent osseous reconstruction with internal hardware. The surgical site was complicated by acute infection, osteomyelitis, exposed hardware requiring removal, and multiple surgical débridement. The degree of soft tissue and osseous deficit post-débridement required complex reconstruction.

Discussion

The osseous deficit was addressed with the use of a permanent PMMA cement spacer. The soft tissue deficit was reconstructed with a free tissue transfer. This case report demonstrates the long term viability and utility of the use of permanent cement spacers when combined with free tissue transfer for closure of complex diabetic foot wounds. This case is an example of a multidisciplinary team approach to limb salvage with successful long term outcome; a plantigrade stable functional foot in an ambulatory highly active patient. Follow up time since initial intervention was 38 months.

Conclusion

The use of a permanent PMMA cement spacer does not preclude free tissue transfer in complex host lower extremity reconstruction. A multidisciplinary team approach is a vital component to successful salvage outcomes.

Multimodal optical measurement for study of lower limb tissue viability in patients with diabetes mellitus

According to the International Diabetes Federation, the challenge of early stage diagnosis and treatment effectiveness monitoring in diabetes is currently one of the highest priorities in modern healthcare. The potential of combined measurements of skin fluorescence and blood perfusion by the laser Doppler flowmetry method in diagnostics of low limb diabetes complications was evaluated. Using Monte Carlo probabilistic modeling, the diagnostic volume and depth of the diagnosis were evaluated. The experimental study involved 76 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. These patients were divided into two groups depending on the degree of complications. The control group consisted of 48 healthy volunteers. The local thermal stimulation was selected as a stimulus on the blood microcirculation system. The experimental studies have shown that diabetic patients have elevated values of normalized fluorescence amplitudes, as well as a lower perfusion response to local heating. In the group of people with diabetes with trophic ulcers, these parameters also significantly differ from the control and diabetes only groups. Thus, the intensity of skin fluorescence and level of tissue blood perfusion can act as markers for various degrees of complications from the beginning of diabetes to the formation of trophic ulcers.

Long-Term Outcomes of Permanent Cement Spacers in the Infected Foot

When osteomyelitis occurs in the infected foot, cement spacers have been used as a limb salvage tool. The aim of the present study was to assess the longevity and outcomes in high-risk, low-demand patients who have undergone resection of bone and subsequent placement of permanent antibiotic-eluting cement spacers in the foot. A retrospective review case series of 30 patients who had undergone placement of a permanent antibiotic-eluting cement spacer in the foot were evaluated for retention, spacer exchange, removal, amputation, and functional status. The minimum follow-up time for inclusion was 12 months. Two thirds of all patients had successful spacers (n = 20) that were either retained (n = 14) or successfully exchanged (n = 6). One third of all patients experienced spacer failure (n = 10) and required removal. Of the 10 patients requiring spacer removal, 4 underwent removal with subsequent arthrodesis and 6 underwent removal with subsequent pseudoarthrosis. Also, 8 of these patients (26.7%) required partial foot amputation of the ipsilateral foot. These amputations were not directly related to the use or removal of the spacer. The average time to spacer removal or partial amputation was 20.9 (range 0.2 to 60.9) months. The longest retained spacer in the foot was 76 months at the last follow-up visit. The longest exchanged spacer at the last follow-up visit was 111 months. All surviving patients were ambulatory at the last follow-up visit.

Magnetic resonance imaging of diabetic foot complications

This pictorial review aims to illustrate the various manifestations of the diabetic foot on magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. The utility of MR imaging and its imaging features in the diagnosis of pedal osteomyelitis are illustrated. There is often difficulty encountered in distinguishing osteomyelitis from neuroarthropathy, both clinically and on imaging. By providing an accurate diagnosis based on imaging, the radiologist plays a significant role in the management of patients with complications of diabetic foot.

Calcaneal Osteomyelitis Associated With a Severe Abscess

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is a common complication of the diabetic foot and the majority of minor and major amputations are preceded by DFO. The diagnosis and treatment of DFO are both challenging. Early recognition and comprehensive management of diabetic foot infections may obviate DFO, hence the dreadful consequence-resection of the infected bone. Herein, we present the successful management of a patient presenting with DFO and severe abscess formation of the heel.

Diagnosing diabetic foot osteomyelitis: narrative review and a suggested 2-step score-based diagnostic pathway for clinicians

The diabetic foot infection remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality in many patients and remains a challenging diagnosis for most clinicians. Diagnosis is largely based on clinical signs supplemented by various imaging tests. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is not readily available to many clinicians, and bone biopsy, which is the accepted criterion standard for diagnosis, is rarely performed routinely. This evidence-based review and the proposed diagnostic scoring pathway substratifies the current International Working Group on the Diabetes Foot guidelines for diagnosing diabetic foot osteomyelitis into a convenient 2-step diagnostic pathway for clinicians. This proposed diagnostic approach will need further validation prospectively, but it can serve as a useful diagnostic tool during the initial assessment and management of diabetic foot infections. A MEDLINE search of English-language articles on diabetic foot osteomyelitis published between 1986 and March 2014 was conducted. Additional articles were also identified through a search of references from the retrieved articles, published guidelines, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses.

Outpatient assessment and management of the diabetic foot

Patients with diabetes and peripheral neuropathy are at risk for foot deformities and mechanical imbalance of the lower extremity. Peripheral neuropathy leads to an insensate foot that puts the patient at risk for injury. When combined with deformity due to neuropathic arthropathy, or Charcot foot, the risks of impending ulceration, infection, and amputation are significant to the diabetic patient. Education of proper foot care and shoe wear cannot be overemphasized. For those with significant malalignment or deformity of the foot and ankle, referral should be made immediately to an orthopedic foot and ankle specialist.

Osteomyelitis or Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy? Differentiating these disorders in diabetic patients with a foot problem

Both osteomyelitis and Charcot neuro-osteoarthropathy (CN) are potentially limb-threatening complications of diabetic neuropathy, but they require quite different treatments. Almost all bone infections in the diabetic foot originate from an infected foot ulcer while diabetic osteoarthropathy is a non-infectious process in which peripheral neuropathy plays the critical role. Differentiating between diabetic foot osteomyelitis and CN requires careful evaluation of the patient, including the medical history, physical examination, selected laboratory findings, and imaging studies. Based on available studies, we review the approaches to the diagnostic differentiation of osteomyelitis from CN of the foot in diabetic patients.

Performance of the probe-to-bone test in a population suspected of having osteomyelitis of the foot in diabetes

BACKGROUND

We investigated the validity of probe-to-bone testing in the diagnosis of osteomyelitis in a selected subgroup of patients clinically suspected of having diabetic foot osteomyelitis.

METHODS

Between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2008, inpatients and outpatients with a diabetic foot ulcer were prospectively evaluated, and those having a clinical diagnosis of foot infection and at least one of the osteomyelitis clinical suspicion criteria were consecutively included in this study.

RESULTS

Sixty-five patients met the inclusion criteria and were prospectively enrolled in the study. Forty-nine patients (75.4%) were hospitalized, and the remaining 16 (24.6%) were followed as outpatients. Osteomyelitis was diagnosed in 39 patients (60.0%). Probe-to-bone test results were positive in 30 patients (46.1%). The positive predictive value for the probe-to-bone test was fairly high (87%), but the negative predictive value was only 62%. The sensitivity and specificity of the test were 66% and 84%, respectively. White blood cell counts and mean C-reactive protein levels did not statistically significantly differ between groups. However, erythrocyte sedimentation rates greater than 70 mm/h reached statistical significance between groups. Wound area and depth were not found to be statistically significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Positive probe-to-bone test results and erythrocyte sedimentation rates greater than 70 mm/h provide some support for the diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis, but it is not strong; magnetic resonance imaging or bone biopsy will probably be required in cases of doubt.

Influence of osteomyelitis location in the foot of diabetic patients with transtibial amputation

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the prevalence of osteomyelitis in different areas of the foot and the possible correlation between localization and outcome of major amputation.

METHODS

From January 2008 to December 2010, a total of 350 diabetic patients were admitted to our diabetic foot unit for the surgical treatment of osteomyelitis. Osteomyelitis was diagnosed when both the probe-to-bone maneuver and plain radiography were positive. In all of these patients, osteomyelitis was confirmed by histological examination.

RESULTS

Osteomyelitis was localized to the forefoot in 300 (85.7%) patients, to the midfoot in 27 (7.7%) patients, and to the hindfoot in the remaining 23 (6.75) patients. On average, foot lesions had developed 6.6 ± 5.6 months before admission to our unit. Transtibial amputation was performed in 1 (0.33%) patient with forefoot osteomyelitis, in 5 (18.5%) patients with midfoot osteomyelitis, and in 12 (52.2%) patients with osteomyelitis of the heel (χ(2) = 128.4, P < .001). Multivariate analysis showed the independent role that osteomyelitis in the heel region had in major amputation outcome (odds ratio 15.3; P < .001; confidence interval, 17.4-5336.0), dialysis treatment (odds ratio 6.3; P = .012; confidence interval, 2.5-1667.2), and leukocyte count greater than 10(3) mm(3) (odds ratio 2.25; P = .036; confidence interval, 1.1-76.6).

CONCLUSIONS

We found a higher rate of transtibial amputation when osteomyelitis involved the heel instead of the midfoot or forefoot in diabetic patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative series.

2012 Infectious Diseases Society of America clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections

Foot infections are a common and serious problem in persons with diabetes. Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) typically begin in a wound, most often a neuropathic ulceration. While all wounds are colonized with microorganisms, the presence of infection is defined by ≥2 classic findings of inflammation or purulence. Infections are then classified into mild (superficial and limited in size and depth), moderate (deeper or more extensive), or severe (accompanied by systemic signs or metabolic perturbations). This classification system, along with a vascular assessment, helps determine which patients should be hospitalized, which may require special imaging procedures or surgical interventions, and which will require amputation. Most DFIs are polymicrobial, with aerobic gram-positive cocci (GPC), and especially staphylococci, the most common causative organisms. Aerobic gram-negative bacilli are frequently copathogens in infections that are chronic or follow antibiotic treatment, and obligate anaerobes may be copathogens in ischemic or necrotic wounds. Wounds without evidence of soft tissue or bone infection do not require antibiotic therapy. For infected wounds, obtain a post-debridement specimen (preferably of tissue) for aerobic and anaerobic culture. Empiric antibiotic therapy can be narrowly targeted at GPC in many acutely infected patients, but those at risk for infection with antibiotic-resistant organisms or with chronic, previously treated, or severe infections usually require broader spectrum regimens. Imaging is helpful in most DFIs; plain radiographs may be sufficient, but magnetic resonance imaging is far more sensitive and specific. Osteomyelitis occurs in many diabetic patients with a foot wound and can be difficult to diagnose (optimally defined by bone culture and histology) and treat (often requiring surgical debridement or resection, and/or prolonged antibiotic therapy). Most DFIs require some surgical intervention, ranging from minor (debridement) to major (resection, amputation). Wounds must also be properly dressed and off-loaded of pressure, and patients need regular follow-up. An ischemic foot may require revascularization, and some nonresponding patients may benefit from selected adjunctive measures. Employing multidisciplinary foot teams improves outcomes. Clinicians and healthcare organizations should attempt to monitor, and thereby improve, their outcomes and processes in caring for DFIs.

Expert opinion on the management of infections in the diabetic foot

This update of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot incorporates some information from a related review of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) and a systematic review of the management of infection of the diabetic foot. The pathophysiology of these infections is now well understood, and there is a validated system for classifying the severity of infections based on their clinical findings. Diagnosing osteomyelitis remains difficult, but several recent publications have clarified the role of clinical, laboratory and imaging tests. Magnetic resonance imaging has emerged as the most accurate means of diagnosing bone infection, but bone biopsy for culture and histopathology remains the criterion standard. Determining the organisms responsible for a diabetic foot infection via culture of appropriately collected tissue specimens enables clinicians to make optimal antibiotic choices based on culture and sensitivity results. In addition to culture-directed antibiotic therapy, most infections require some surgical intervention, ranging from minor debridement to major resection, amputation or revascularization. Clinicians must also provide proper wound care to ensure healing of the wound. Various adjunctive therapies may benefit some patients, but the data supporting them are weak. If properly treated, most diabetic foot infections can be cured. Providers practising in developing countries, and their patients, face especially challenging situations.

Outcome of patients with diabetes with negative percutaneous bone biopsy performed for suspicion of osteomyelitis of the foot

AIMS

To assess the outcome of patients with diabetes with suspicion of osteomyelitis of the foot who had undergone a percutaneous bone biopsy that yielded negative microbiological results, with focus on the occurrence of osteomyelitis at the biopsied site.

METHODS

Medical charts of adult patients with diabetes with a negative percutaneous bone biopsy were reviewed. Patients' outcome was evaluated at least 2 years after the initial bone biopsy according to wound healing, the results of a new bone biopsy and bone imaging evaluation when applicable.

RESULTS

From January 2001 to January 2008, 41 patients with diabetes (30 men/11 women; mean age 58.1 ± 9.6 years; mean diabetes duration 15.8 ± 6.7 years) met study criteria. Osteomyelitis was suspected based on combined clinical and imaging diagnostic criteria. On follow-up at a mean duration of 41.2 ± 22.5 months post-bone biopsy, 16 patients had complete wound healing (39.0%). Of the 25 other patients, 15 had a new bone biopsy performed, six of which yielded positive microbiological results, and among the 10 patients who neither healed nor underwent bone biopsy, comparative radiography of the foot showed a stable aspect of the biopsied site in six of them, for whom the data were available. Finally, osteomyelitis of the foot at the site where the initial bone biopsy had been performed was confirmed during follow-up in six patients (14.6%) and was suspected in four additional patients (9.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study suggest that, of patients with diabetes with the suspicion of osteomylelitis and a negative percutaneous bone biopsy, only one out of four will develop osteomyelitis within 2 years of the biopsy.

Bone and joint infections in adults: a comprehensive classification proposal

Introduction and methods

Ten currently available classifications were tested for their ability to describe a continuous cohort of 300 adult patients affected by bone and joint infections. Each classification only focused, on the average, on 1.3 ± 0.4 features of a single clinical condition (osteomyelitis, implant-related infections, or septic arthritis), being able to classify 34.8 ± 24.7% of the patients, while a comprehensive classification system could describe all the patients considered in the study.

Result and conclusion

A comprehensive classification system permits more accurate classification of bone and joint infections in adults than any single classification available and may serve for didactic, scientific, and clinical purposes.

Triggering mechanisms of neuroarthropathy following conservative surgery for osteomyelitis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to raise awareness and stimulate discussion of the possible triggering factors of Charcot neuroarthropathy by presenting the case of one patient who had both undergone surgery and was suffering from osteomyelitis.

CASE REPORT

We have extracted one case from our data set for a patient who underwent conservative surgery for osteomyelitis and subsequently developed acute Charcot in the midfoot. We present the clinical findings, photographs and X-ray studies. Preoperative X-ray showed irregular severe bone destruction in the fourth metatarsal head and a fracture of the fourth metatarsal bone. No signs of midfoot Charcot neuroarthropathy were found in this preoperative X-ray. The third and fourth metatarsal bones were both removed and the surgical wound was left open to heal by second intention. Histopathological study confirmed osteomyelitis in the bone sample. Twenty-five days after surgery, the surgical wound showed no signs of infection and healing progressed in a satisfactory way. However, the foot was swollen, erythematous and warm. Skin temperature was two degrees higher than the contralateral foot. X-ray was taken and acute neuroarthropathy of the tarso-metatarsal joints was diagnosed.

CONCLUSIONS

Charcot neuroarthropathy appears to have been triggered by bone infection and/or surgery. We believe that the pivotal factor in the development of acute Charcot neuroarthropathy in this case was the weight bearing in the deformed foot so soon after the operation. Immobilization of the foot is critical as it serves to decrease the inflammation which has a key role in the development of Charcot neuroarthropathy.

The potential role of magnetic resonance imaging in patients with Hansen's neuropathy of the feet: a preliminary communication

A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol was performed in leprosy patients with a neuropathic foot and superficial ulcers and/or localized cellulitis but no clinical suspicion of osteomyelitis. The aim of the study was to determine if unsuspected osteomyelitis was present in this defined group of leprosy patients. A total of 15 neuropathic feet from 9 patients were included. Clinically and on MRI, the forefoot was predominantly affected. MRI findings of osteomyelitis were found in 4 feet. In feet with osteomyelitis, 3 had a superficial ulcer and 3 had clinical signs of localized cellulitis. A clinical diagnosis of cellulitis was confirmed on MRI in 2 feet.A striking discrepancy between clinical and MRI findings was found.This study shows that, compared with clinical evaluation, MRI is a sensitive method for the detection of unsuspected osteomyelitis in neuropathic feet with superficial ulcers and/or cellulitis. MRI findings in this group of patients may influence clinical decision making and may prevent further complications, because osteomyelitis requires more aggressive medical treatment. This preliminary communication should pave the wave for designed controlled studies so that patients with Hansen's neuropathy may get the best medical care.

Whole body MR imaging in diabetes

Diabetes mellitus is a major cardiovascular risk factor and one of the major causes for morbidity and mortality worldwide. Diabetic complications have not only major impact on the quality of life of diabetic patients, but are also potentially life-threatening. Therefore prevention, diagnosis and therapy of these long-term complications are of high importance. However, diagnosis of the variety of complications from diabetes mellitus remains a diagnostic challenge and usually several diagnostic steps are necessary to diagnose or exclude these complications. In the last years whole body magnetic resonance imaging (WB-MRI) including whole body magnetic resonance angiography (WB-MRA) has been introduced for cardiovascular imaging and is now increasingly applied in clinical routine for the workup of patients with cardiovascular disease and for cardiovascular screening. The article summarizes rationales for WB-MRI in diabetes mellitus, technical concepts of disease specific cardiovascular WB-MRI in diabetes mellitus and discusses potential clinical consequences.

Charcot neuroarthropathy triggered by osteomyelitis and/or surgery

INTRODUCTION

Charcot neuroarthropathy (CN) is a rare but devastating complication of diabetic neuropathy. Osteomyelitis is also a complication of the diabetic foot and it may be difficult to differentiate from CN.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A patient with Type 1 diabetes and peripheral neuropathy developed a foot ulcer complicated by osteomyelitis of the first proximal phalanx. He was successfully treated with antibiotics and surgical excision of the infected bone. Six months later, he developed a hot, swollen, red foot and X-ray showed destruction of the second and third metatarsal heads. At the second presentation, it was difficult to determine whether this was a recurrence of osteomyelitis or a new onset of CN. Thus, to obtain a definitive diagnosis, recourse was made to more sophisticated imaging techniques.

RESULTS

99mTc methylenediphosphonate (MDP) bone scans and magnetic resonance imaging proved inconclusive to differentiate between osteomyelitis and CN. Subsequently, an indium-labelled white cell scan confirmed the absence of osteomyelitis and the patient was successfully treated for CN.

DISCUSSION

Infection and/or surgery may be predisposing factors in the development of diabetic CN but the combination of the two could accelerate the onset of the Charcot process in people with diabetes and neuropathy.

Unresolved issues in the management of ulcers of the foot in diabetes

Management of diabetic foot ulcers presents a major clinical challenge. The response to treatment is often poor and the outcome disappointing, while the costs are high for both healthcare providers and the patient. In such circumstances, it is essential that management should be based on firm evidence and follow consensus. In the case of the diabetic foot, however, clinical practice can vary widely. It is for these reasons that the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot has published guidelines for adoption worldwide. The Group has now also completed a series of non-systematic and systematic reviews on the subjects of soft tissue infection, osteomyelitis, offloading and other interventions designed to promote ulcer healing. The current article collates the results of this work in order to demonstrate the extent and quality of the evidence which is available in these areas. In general, the available scientific evidence is thin, leaving many issues unresolved. Although the complex nature of diabetic foot disease presents particular difficulties in the design of robust clinical trials, and the absence of published evidence to support the use of an intervention does not always mean that the intervention is ineffective, there is a clear need for more research in the area. Evidence from sound clinical studies is urgently needed to guide consensus and to underpin clinical practice. It is only in this way that patients suffering with these frequently neglected complications of diabetes can be offered the best hope for a favourable outcome, at the least cost.

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis: a progress report on diagnosis and a systematic review of treatment

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot appointed an expert panel to provide evidence-based guidance on the management of osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot. Initially, the panel formulated a consensus scheme for the diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) for research purposes, and undertook a systematic review of the evidence relating to treatment. The consensus diagnostic scheme was based on expert opinion; the systematic review was based on a search for reports of the effectiveness of treatment for DFO published prior to December 2006. The panel reached consensus on a proposed scheme that assesses the probability of DFO, based on clinical findings and the results of imaging and laboratory investigations. The literature review identified 1168 papers, 19 of which fulfilled criteria for detailed data extraction. No significant differences in outcome were associated with any particular treatment strategy. There was no evidence that surgical debridement of the infected bone is routinely necessary. Culture and sensitivity of isolates from bone biopsy may assist in selecting properly targeted antibiotic regimens, but empirical regimens should include agents active against staphylococci, administered either intravenously or orally (with a highly bioavailable agent). There are no data to support the superiority of any particular route of delivery of systemic antibiotics or to inform the optimal duration of antibiotic therapy. No available evidence supports the use of any adjunctive therapies, such as hyperbaric oxygen, granulocyte-colony stimulating factor or larvae. We have proposed a scheme for diagnosing DFO for research purposes. Data to inform treatment choices in DFO are limited, and further research is urgently needed.

Clinical management of diabetic foot infection: diagnostics, therapeutics and the future

Diabetic foot infection accounts for a substantial global burden of morbidity, psychosocial disruption and economic cost. Recommendations for best practice are continuously evolving in parallel with improvements in imaging modalities, development and clinical use of new antimicrobial agents and data surrounding novel adjunctive strategies. We discuss this complex group of infections with a particular emphasis on medical management of osteomyelitis, while also highlighting the importance of a broad multidisciplinary approach to eradicating infection.

Osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot: diagnosis and management

Neuropathic ulcerations and altered immune function place the diabetic patient at increased risk for polymicrobial osteomyelitis of the foot and ankle. The optimal method for evaluation and management of this difficult condition is controversial, and further studies are needed. Infected ulcers with exposed or palpable bone can be assumed to have underlying osteomyelitis. Although plain film should be ordered in each case, MRI is most often used for evaluation and surgical planning. Difficult cases, such as those associated with Charcot osteoarthropathy, may require labeled leukocyte scanning or bone biopsy to arrive at the diagnosis. A multidisciplinary team approach is best, allowing optimal treatment of all associated conditions that commonly affect patients with diabetes mellitus. Vascular evaluation and intervention are critical in the presence of vascular insufficiency or ischemia. Empiric, usually broad-spectrum antibiotics and meticulous local wound care may achieve remission of mild to moderately severe infections and should be included in all treatment regimens. Severe, infections, ischemia, or sepsis requires an aggressive surgical approach. Bone resection, correction of deformity, or amputation often are necessary and should be done with the goal of salvaging a functional foot.

Nonsurgical strategies for healing and preventing recurrence of diabetic foot ulcers

We have outlined an approach to the nonsurgical treatment of diabetic foot ulcers based on an understanding of their etiology. We have emphasized the importance of off-loading as the crucial element to success in healing foot ulcers and preventing their recurrence in those with diabetes. Computerized design of custom insoles can allow the unloading of elevated plantar pressure while incorporating the shape of the foot, which was formerly the major criterion used insole design.

Diabetic Foot Disease

OBJECTIVE

To review the spectrum of foot problems in patients with diabetes and the underlying etiologic factors.

METHODS

In this review, the term "diabetic foot disease" (DFD) will be used (previously referred to as simply "diabetic foot"). The relevant anatomy of the foot is discussed, the clinical evaluation and severity of DFD are outlined, and the role of both systemic control and local measures in the management of DFD is addressed.

RESULTS

DFD is linked with a wide variety of etiologic associations, pathologic forms, and clinical severity. The causes of DFD include such factors as diabetic neuropathy, vascular insufficiency, and the presence of underlying bone deformity. The pathologic forms range from superficial skin lesions, soft tissue infections, joint swellings, and deformities to frank necrosis and gangrene. The clinical severity ranges from mild, self-resolving disease to fulminant, rapidly progressive disease that usually eventuates in amputation. The heterogeneity of patients whose illness is grouped collectively under the diagnosis of DFD has contributed to the persisting confusion and controversy regarding the optimal classification system for diabetes-related foot problems and their appropriate management.

CONCLUSION

Optimal management of DFD involves a multimodality approach directed at regular foot care, blood glucose control, and early recognition of foot problems. Appropriate surgical management, administration of systemic antibiotics, and off-loading techniques are necessary to prevent the progression of DFD.

Diabetic foot disorders. A clinical practice guideline (2006 revision)

The prevalence of diabetes mellitus is growing at epidemic proportions in the United States and worldwide. Most alarming is the steady increase in type 2 diabetes, especially among young and obese people. An estimated 7% of the US population has diabetes, and because of the increased longevity of this population, diabetes-associated complications are expected to rise in prevalence. Foot ulcerations, infections, Charcot neuroarthropathy, and peripheral arterial disease frequently result in gangrene and lower limb amputation. Consequently, foot disorders are leading causes of hospitalization for persons with diabetes and account for billion-dollar expenditures annually in the US. Although not all foot complications can be prevented, dramatic reductions in frequency have been achieved by taking a multidisciplinary approach to patient management. Using this concept, the authors present a clinical practice guideline for diabetic foot disorders based on currently available evidence, committee consensus, and current clinical practice. The pathophysiology and treatment of diabetic foot ulcers, infections, and the diabetic Charcot foot are reviewed. While these guidelines cannot and should not dictate the care of all affected patients, they provide evidence-based guidance for general patterns of practice. If these concepts are embraced and incorporated into patient management protocols, a major reduction in diabetic limb amputations is certainly an attainable goal.

Evidence-Based Protocol for Diabetic Foot Ulcers

BACKGROUND

Diabetic foot ulcers are the single biggest risk factor for nontraumatic foot amputations in persons with diabetes. Foot ulcers occur in 12 to 25 percent of persons with diabetes and precede 84 percent of all nontraumatic amputations in this growing population. Because of the high incidence of foot ulcers, amputations remain a source of morbidity and mortality in persons with diabetes. Strict adherence to evidence-based protocols as described herein will prevent the majority of these amputations.

METHODS

The collective experience of treating patients with neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers in four major diabetic foot programs in the United States and Europe was analyzed.

RESULTS

The following protocol was developed for patients with diabetic foot ulcers: (1) establishment of good communication among the patient, the wound healing team, and the primary medical doctor; (2) comprehensive, protocol-driven care of the entire patient, including hemoglobin A1c, microalbuminuria, and cholesterol as well as early treatment of retinopathy, nephropathy, and cardiac disease; (3) weekly objective measurement of the wound with digital photography, planimetry, and documentation of the wound-healing process using the Wound Electronic Medical Record, if available; (4) objective evaluation of blood flow in the lower extremities (e.g., noninvasive flow studies); (5) débridement of hyperkeratotic, infected, and nonviable tissue; (6) use of systemic antibiotics for deep infection, drainage, and cellulitis; (7) off-loading; (8) maintenance of a moist wound bed; (9) use of growth factor and/or cellular therapy if the wound is not healing after 3 weeks with this protocol; and (10) consideration of the use of vacuum-assisted therapy in complex wounds.

CONCLUSIONS

In diabetic foot ulcers, availability of the above modalities, in combination with early recognition and comprehensive treatment, ensures rapid healing, minimizes morbidity and mortality rates, and eliminates toe and limb amputations in the absence of ischemia and osteomyelitis.

MRI of the diabetic foot: differentiation of infection from neuropathic change

The aim of this review is to illustrate the magnetic resonance imaging features that can help differentiate osteomyelitis from neuropathic osteoarthropathy in the foot.

Imagerie ostéo-articulaire du pied diabétique

Destruction in diabetic feet is secondary to neuropathy (peripheral and autonomic nervous system) in association with microangiopathy. The loss of sensation to pain and the static trouble lead to increase the pressure in some areas and predispose to pedal skin ulceration, the precursor of osteomyelitis. Plain radiography should be the first step in the evaluation for diagnosis and follow-up. The initial patterns are nonspecific but very rapid evolution associating osteolysis, osteosclerosis and fragmentation lead to the Charcot foot. When osteomyelitis is suspected, scintigraphy with labelled white blood cells and MRI are necessary to differentiate infection from neuropathy.

Treatment for diabetic foot ulcers

People with diabetes develop foot ulcers because of neuropathy (sensory, motor, and autonomic deficits), ischaemia, or both. The initiating injury may be from acute mechanical or thermal trauma or from repetitively or continuously applied mechanical stress. Patients with clinically significant limb ischaemia should be assessed by a vascular surgeon to determine the need for angioplasty, stenting, or femorodistal bypass. When infection complicates a foot ulcer, the combination can be limb or life-threatening. Infection is defined clinically, but wound cultures reveal the causative pathogens. Tissue specimens are strongly preferred to wound swabs for wound cultures. Antimicrobial therapy should be guided by culture results, and should aim to cure the infection, not to heal the wound. Alleviation of the mechanical load on ulcers (off-loading) should always be a part of treatment. Neuropathic ulcers typically heal in 6 weeks with total contact casting, because it effectively relieves pressure at the ulcer site and enforces patient compliance. The success of other approaches to off-loading similarly depends on the patients' adherence to the effectiveness of pressure relief. Surgery to heal ulcers and prevent recurrence can include tenotomy, tendon lengthening, reconstruction, or removal of bony prominences. However, these procedures may result in secondary ulceration and other complications. Ulcer recurrence rates are high, but appropriate education for patients, the provision of posthealing footwear, and regular foot care can reduce rates of re-ulceration.

MR imaging of the diabetic foot: diagnostic challenges

Pedal complications of diabetes have long presented a challenge for the clinician and radiologist predominately related to the difficulty in distinguishing infection from neuroarthropathy. The spectrum of diabetic foot infections is broad, ranging from callous and ulcer formation, to septic arthritis, abscess formation, and osteomyelitis. This article summarizes the MR imaging findings in the diabetic foot and the optimal pulse sequences. Focus is placed on aids in differentiating diabetic infection from other entities and increasing the specificity of diagnosing diabetic foot complications.