Sodium carboxyl-methyl-cellulose dressings in the management of deep ulcerations of diabetic foot

Effectiveness of different advanced wound dressings versus standard of care for the management of diabetic foot ulcers: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for the development of the Italian guidelines for the treatment of diabetic foot syndrome

AIM

to assess the effects of advanced wound dressings (AWD) commonly used in the treatment of predominantly neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) The present meta-analysis was designed to support the development of the Italian Guidelines for the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Syndrome (DFS).

METHODS

A Medline and Embase search were performed up to April 1st, 2024 collecting all RCTs including diabetic patients or reporting subgroup analyses on diabetic patients with DFU comparing AWD with placebo/standard of care (SoC), with a duration of at least 12 weeks. Prespecified endpoints were: ulcer healing (principal), time-to-healing, frequency of dressings change, major and minor amputation, pain, and all-cause mortality. AWD assessed were: alginates; foam, hydrocolloids, hydrogels, hyaluronic acid, hemoglobin spray, silver-impregnated, sucrose octasulfate-impregnated, honey-impregnated, micro-organism-binding, and protease-modulating matrix dressings. Mantel-Haenzel Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (MH-OR, 95% CIs) were either calculated or extracted directly from the publications. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and 95% CIs were calculated for continuous variables.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies fulfilled all inclusion criteria. Participants treated with AWD had a significantly higher ulcer healing rate and shorter time-to-healing in comparison with SoC/placebo (MH-OR 1.50 [0.80, 2.79], p = 0.20 and WMD:: - 24.38 [- 42.90, - 5.86] days, p = 0.010). No other significant effect on the above reported prespecified endpoints were observed. For the primary endpoint, the quality of evidence was rated as "moderate".

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, AWD, particularly sucrose-octasulfate, hydrogels, hyaluronic acid, and honey dressings, can actively promote wound healing and shortening time-to-healing in patients with DFU.

Should video laryngoscopy or direct laryngoscopy be used for adults undergoing endotracheal intubation in the pre-hospital setting? A critical appraisal of a systematic review

The safety and utility of endotracheal intubation by paramedics in the United Kingdom is a matter of debate. Considering the controversy surrounding the safety of paramedic-performed endotracheal intubation, any interventions that enhance patient safety should be evaluated for implementation based on solid evidence of their effectiveness. A systematic review performed by Hansel and colleagues (2022) sought to assess compare video laryngoscopes against direct laryngoscopes in clinical practice. This commentary aims to critically appraise the methods used within the review by Hansel et al (2022) and expand upon the findings in the context of clinical practice.

Microwave-Treated Physically Cross-Linked Sodium Alginate and Sodium Carboxymethyl Cellulose Blend Polymer Film for Open Incision Wound Healing in Diabetic Animals-A Novel Perspective for Skin Tissue Regeneration Application

This study aimed at developing the microwave-treated, physically cross-linked polymer blend film, optimizing the microwave treatment time, and testing for physicochemical attributes and wound healing potential in diabetic animals. Microwave-treated and untreated films were prepared by the solution casting method and characterized for various attributes required by a wound healing platform. The optimized formulation was tested for skin regeneration potential in the diabetes-induced open-incision animal model. The results indicated that the optimized polymer film formulation (MB-3) has significantly enhanced physicochemical properties such as high moisture adsorption (154.6 ± 4.23%), decreased the water vapor transmission rate (WVTR) value of (53.0 ± 2.8 g/m²/h) and water vapor permeability (WVP) value (1.74 ± 0.08 g mm/h/m²), delayed erosion (18.69 ± 4.74%), high water uptake, smooth and homogenous surface morphology, higher tensile strength (56.84 ± 1.19 MPa), and increased glass transition temperature and enthalpy (through polymer hydrophilic functional groups depicting efficient cross-linking). The in vivo data on day 16 of post-wounding indicated that the wound healing occurred faster with significantly increased percent re-epithelialization and enhanced collagen deposition with optimized MB-3 film application compared with the untreated group. The study concluded that the microwave-treated polymer blend films have sufficiently enhanced physical properties, making them an effective candidate for ameliorating the diabetic wound healing process and hastening skin tissue regeneration.

Cost-effectiveness of Novel Macrophage-Regulating Treatment for Wound Healing in Patients With Diabetic Foot Ulcers From the Taiwan Health Care Sector Perspective

IMPORTANCE

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) and subsequent amputation incur enormous health and economic burdens to patients, health care systems, and societies. As a novel macrophage-regulating drug, ON101 is a breakthrough treatment for DFUs, which demonstrated significant complete wound healing effects in a phase 3 randomized clinical trial, but its economic value remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of an ON101 cream added on to general wound care (GWC; ie, conventional treatments for DFUs, which comprised initial and regular foot examinations, ulcer management, comorbidity control, patient education, and multidisciplinary care) vs GWC alone for DFUs from the Taiwan health care sector perspective.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This economic evaluation used a hypothetical cohort of patients with diabetes, with characteristics mirroring those of the participants in the ON101 trial. A Markov state-transition simulation model was constructed to estimate costs and health outcomes associated with the ON101 with GWC and GWC alone strategies over a 5-year time horizon, discounting costs and effectiveness at 3% annually. Costs were in 2021 US dollars. Data were sourced from the ON101 trial and supplemented from published literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the uncertainty of input parameters and study generalizability. The analysis was designed and conducted from September 1, 2020, to January 31, 2022.

EXPOSURES

ON101 with GWC vs GWC alone.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

DFU-related complications, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

Patients in the hypothetical cohort had a mean age of 57 years and an uninfected DFU of 1 to 25 cm2 that was present for 4 or more weeks with a Wagner grade of 1 or 2. Over 5 years, the ON101 with GWC group vs the GWC alone group experienced more healing events, stayed for a longer time in the healing state, and had fewer infected DFUs, gangrene, and amputations (eg, 2787 additional healing events and 2766 fewer infected DFU, 72 fewer amputation, and 7 fewer gangrene events in the ON101 with GWC group vs GWC alone group). The ON101 with GWC strategy vs GWC alone yielded an additional 0.038 QALYs at an incremental cost of $571, resulting in $14 922/QALY gained. Economic results were most sensitive to healing efficacy, drug cost, and health utility of the healing state. Cost-saving results were observed in patient subgroups with poor glycemic control, larger ulcer sizes, longer ulcer durations, and current smoking. The ON101 with GWC strategy was considered cost-effective in 60% to 82% of model iterations against willingness-to-pay thresholds of $32 787/QALY gained to $98 361/QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this economic evaluation study using a simulated patient cohort, the ON101 with GWC strategy represented good value compared with GWC alone for patients with DFUs from the Taiwan health care sector perspective and may be prioritized for those with high risks for disease progression of DFUs.

Debridement of diabetic foot ulcers: public health and clinical implications – a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression

Background

Diabetic foot ulceration (DFU) has devastating complications and a lifetime occurrence of 15%–34%. Debridement of DFU is regarded as an intervention that accelerates ulcer healing and may reduce complications including amputations, infections, and poor quality of life (QoL), which have serious public health and clinical implications. A systematic review (SR) of SRs and of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with meta-analyses (MAs) on debridement of DFU that synthesizes all human experimental evidence is warranted.

Objectives

Are debridement methods in DFU beneficial over other forms and standard gauze dressings (control condition) in these outcomes?

Study eligibility criteria

All SRs/MAs/RCTs comparing debridement methods for DFU with alternative methods of debridement and with control.

Data sources

Cochrane Wounds Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, EBSCO, CINAHL, and Web of Science.

Participants and interventions

Adults with type 1/2 diabetes with DFU and any debridement method compared with alternative debridement methods or control.

Main Outcomes

Amputation rates, wound infections, QoL, proportion of ulcers healed, time to complete healing, ulcer recurrence, and treatment cost.

Study selection and analysis

Data extraction/synthesis by two independent reviewers pooled using a random-effects model with sensitivity analysis.

Results

10 SRs were retrieved and reported qualitatively. Six SRs included MAs. This SR included 30 studies, with 2654 participants, using 19 debridement combinations. The debridement methods were compared with findings pooled into MAs. Meta-regression (MR) did not identify significant predictors/moderators of outcomes.

Limitations

The studies may have been under-powered. The inclusion/exclusion criteria varied and the increased risk of bias contributed to low-quality evidence.

Discussion/Conclusion

Weak evidence exists that debridement methods are superior to other forms of debridement or control in DFU.

Implications

Researchers should follow standardized reporting guidelines (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials). Clinicians/investigators could use the findings from this SR/MA/MR in guiding patient-individualized decision making and designing future RCTs.

The performance of gelling fibre wound dressings under clinically relevant robotic laboratory tests

The effectiveness of wound dressing performance in exudate management is commonly gauged in simple, non‐realistic laboratory setups, typically, where dressing specimens are submersed in vessels containing aqueous solutions, rather than by means of clinically relevant test configurations. Specifically, two key fluid–structure interaction concepts: sorptivity—the ability of wound dressings to transfer exudate, including viscous fluids, away from the wound bed by capillary action and durability—the capacity of dressings to maintain their structural integrity over time and particularly, at removal events, have not been properly addressed in existing test protocols. The present article reviews our recent published research concerning the development of clinically relevant testing methods for wound dressings, focussing on the clinical relevance of the tests as well as on the standardisation and automation of laboratory measurements of dressing performance. A second objective of this work was to compile the experimental results characterising the performance of gelling fibre dressings, which were acquired using advanced testing methods, to demonstrate differences across products that apparently belong to the same “gelling fibre” family but differ remarkably in materials, structure and composition and, thereby, in performance.

Hydrocolloid dressing improves wound healing by increasing M2 macrophage polarization in mice with diabetes

Impaired wound healing is one of the most common complications of diabetes, and is known to be caused by multiple complicated factors. For instance, impaired angiogenesis, neuropathy, and hyperglycemia all function to delay subsequent wound closure. Alternatively, moist wound healing, which provides an appropriate environment for wounds, was reported to permit rapid healing by managing wound exudate. Accordingly, wound dressing materials that facilitate moist healing have been developed. The present study sought to clarify the effects of wound dressing material for moist healing of diabetic wounds, in terms of the dynamics of angiogenic factors and macrophages, using a mouse model of naturally occurring diabetes. Wounds with full-thickness skin defects were inflicted on the backs of mice and covered with dressing materials of hydrogel or gauze (control), which were retained for 3, 5, 7, 10, or 14 days following wound generation. During this time, the localization of neutrophils, fibroblasts and macrophages as well as the expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in the wounds and surrounding areas was observed each day. Healing clearly occurred in the hydrogel group with an increase in neutrophils and the angiogenic factor, VEGF. Moreover, the use of hydrogel resulted in a rapid rise in M1 macrophages, which appeared in the early stage of the injury, as well as rapid subsequent appearance of M2 macrophages. Thus, herein, we demonstrate that the formation of a moist environment via wound dressing material effectively improves diabetic wound healing.

Effectiveness of interventions to enhance healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes: a systematic review

The management of diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) remains a challenge, and there is continuing uncertainty concerning optimal approaches to wound healing. The International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) working group on wound healing has previously published systematic reviews of the evidence in 2008, 2012 and 2016 to inform protocols for routine care and to highlight areas which should be considered for further study. The working group has now updated this review by considering papers on the interventions to improve the healing of DFU's published between June 2014 and August 2018. Methodological quality of selected studies was independently assessed by a minimum of two reviewers using the recently published 21-point questionnaire as recommended by IWGDF/European Wound Management Association, as well as the previously incorporated Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Of the 2275 papers identified, 97 were finally selected for grading following full text review. Overall, there has been an improvement in study design and a significant rise in the number of published studies. While previous systematic reviews did not find any evidence to justify the use of newer therapies, except for negative pressure wound therapy in post-surgical wounds, in this review we found additional evidence to support some interventions including a sucrose-octasulfate dressing, the combined leucocyte, fibrin and platelet patch as well as topical application of some placental membrane products, all when used in addition to usual best care. Nonetheless, the assessment and comparison of published trials remains difficult with marked clinical heterogeneity between studies: in patient selection, study duration, standard of usual care provision and the timing and description of the clinical endpoints.

Guidelines on use of interventions to enhance healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update)

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease since 1999. In conjunction with advice from internal and external reviewers and expert consultants in the field, this update is based on a systematic review of the literature centred on the following: the Population (P), Intervention (I), Comparator (C) and Outcomes (O) framework; the use of the SIGN guideline/Cochrane review system; and the 21 point scoring system advocated by IWGDF/EWMA. This has resulted in 13 recommendations. The recommendation on sharp debridement and the selection of dressings remain unchanged from the last recommendations published in 2016. The recommendation to consider negative pressure wound therapy in post-surgical wounds and the judicious use of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in certain non-healing ischaemic ulcers also remains unchanged. Recommendations against the use of growth factors, autologous platelet gels, bioengineered skin products, ozone, topical carbon dioxide, nitric oxide or interventions reporting improvement of ulcer healing through an alteration of the physical environment or through other systemic medical or nutritional means also remain. New recommendations include consideration of the use of sucrose-octasulfate impregnated dressings in difficult to heal neuro-ischaemic ulcers and consideration of the use of autologous combined leucocyte, platelet and fibrin patch in ulcers that are difficult to heal, in both cases when used in addition to best standard of care. A further new recommendation is the consideration of topical placental derived products when used in addition to best standard of care.

Biopolymer-based biomaterials for accelerated diabetic wound healing: A critical review

Non-healing, chronic wounds place a huge burden on healthcare systems as well as individual patients. These chronic wounds especially diabetic wounds will ultimately lead to compromised mobility, amputation of limbs and even death. Currently, wounds and limb ulcers associated with diabetes remain significant health issues; the associated healthcare cost ultimately leads to the increased clinical burden. The presence of diabetes interrupts a highly coordinated cascade of events in the wound closure process. Advances in the understanding of pathophysiological conditions associated with diabetic wounds lead to the development of drug delivery systems which can enhance wound healing by targeting various phases of the impaired processes. Wound environments typically contain degradative enzymes, along with an elevated pH and demonstrate a physiological cascade involved in the regeneration of tissue, which requires the application of an effective delivery system. This article aims to review the pathophysiological conditions associated with chronic and diabetic wounds. The delivery systems, involved in their treatment are described, highlighting potential biomaterials and polymers for establishing drug delivery systems, specifically for the treatment of diabetic wounds and the promotion of the associated mechanisms involved in advanced wound healing. Emerging approaches and engineered devices for effective wound care are reported. The discussion will give insight into the mechanisms relevant to all stages of wound healing.

Treatment of diabetic foot ulcers with Therapeutic Magnetic Resonance (TMR®) improves the quality of granulation tissue

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) often result in severely adverse outcomes, such as serious infections, hospitalization, and lower extremity amputations. In last few years, to improve the outcome of DFUs, clinicians and researchers put their attention on the application of low intensity pulsating electro-magnetic fields through Therapeutic Magnetic Resonance (TMR®). In our study, patients with DFUs have been divided into two groups: The Sham Group treated with non-functioning TMR® device, and the Active Group treated with a functioning device. Biopsies were recovered from ulcers before and after a 15-day treatment with both kind of TMR® device. To recognize signs of inflammation or healing process, the harvested biopsies were subjected to histological and molecular analyses. The histological analysis showed a change in cell population after treatment with TMR®: an increase of fibroblasts and endothelial cells with a reduction of inflammatory cells. After TMR® application, the gene expression profile analysis revealed an improvement in extracellular matrix components such as matrix metalloproteinases, collagens and integrins, a reduction in pro-inflammatory interleukins, and an increase in growth factors expression. In conclusion, our research has identified histological and molecular features of reduced inflammation and increased cell proliferation during the wound healing process in response to TMR® application.

Wounds research for patient benefit: a 5-year programme of research

Background

Complex wounds are those that heal by secondary intention and include lower-limb ulcers, pressure ulcers and some surgical wounds. The care of people with complex wounds is costly, with care mainly being delivered by community nurses. There is a lack of current, high-quality data regarding the numbers and types of people affected, care received and outcomes achieved.

Objectives

To (1) assess how high-quality data about complex wounds can be captured effectively for use in both service planning and research while ensuring integration with current clinical data collection systems and minimal impact on staff time; (2) investigate whether or not a clinical register of people with complex wounds could give valid estimates of treatment effects, thus reducing dependence on large-scale randomised controlled trials (RCTs); (3) identify the most important research questions and outcomes for people with complex wounds from the perspectives of patients, carers and health-care professionals; (4) evaluate the potential contributions to decision-making of individual patient data meta-analysis and mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis; and (5) complete and update systematic reviews in topic areas of high priority.

Methods

To meet objectives 1 and 2 we conducted a prevalence survey and developed and piloted a longitudinal disease register. A consultative, deliberative method and in-depth interviews were undertaken to address objective 3. To address objectives 4 and 5 we conducted systematic reviews including mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis.

Results

From the prevalence survey we estimated the point prevalence of all complex wounds to be 1.47 per 1000 people (95% confidence interval 1.38 to 1.56 per 1000 people). Pressure ulcers and venous leg ulcers were the most common type of complex wound. A total of 195 people with a complex wound were recruited to a complex wounds register pilot. We established the feasibility of correctly identifying, extracting and transferring routine NHS data into the register; however, participant recruitment, data collection and tracking individual wounds in people with multiple wounds were challenging. Most patients and health professionals regarded healing of the wound as the primary treatment goal. Patients were greatly troubled by the social consequences of having a complex wound. Complex wounds are frequently a consequence of, and are themselves, a long-term condition but treatment is usually focused on healing the wound. Consultative, deliberative research agenda setting on pressure ulcer prevention and treatment with patients, carers and clinicians yielded 960 treatment uncertainties and a top 12 list of research priorities. Of 167 RCTs of complex wound treatments in a systematic review of study quality, 41% did not specify a primary outcome and the overall quality of the conduct and reporting of the research was poor. Mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis in areas of high priority identified that matrix hydrocolloid dressings had the highest probability (70%) of being the most effective dressing for diabetic foot ulcers, whereas a hyaluronan fleece dressing had the highest probability (35%) of being the most effective dressing for venous ulcers; however, the quality of this evidence was low and uncertainty is high.

Conclusions

Complex wounds are common and costly with a poor evidence base for many frequent clinical decisions. There is little routine clinical data collection in community nursing. A prospective complex wounds register has the potential to both assist clinical decision-making and provide important research evidence but would be challenging to implement without investment in information technology in NHS community services. Future work should focus on developing insights into typical wound healing trajectories, identifying factors that are prognostic for healing and assessing the cost-effectiveness of selected wound treatments.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

Cutaneous Tissue Engineering and Lower Extremity Wounds (Part 2)

In a previous article, this group described the principles involved in the development of bioengineered skin equivalents that held out much promise. This article has examined some of the uses of such products in treating venous ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers, and skin diseases leaving skin wounds. Data encouraging the use of such products in certain indications are available. The costs of using such products are also appreciated.

Effectiveness of interventions to enhance healing of chronic ulcers of the foot in diabetes: a systematic review

The outcome of management of diabetic foot ulcers remains a challenge, and there remains continuing uncertainty concerning optimal approaches to management. It is for these reasons that in 2008 and 2012, the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) working group on wound healing published systematic reviews of the evidence to inform protocols for routine care and to highlight areas, which should be considered for further study. The same working group has now updated this review by considering papers on the interventions to improve the healing of chronic ulcers published between June 2010 and June 2014. Methodological quality of selected studies was independently assessed by two reviewers using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Selected studies fell into the following ten categories: sharp debridement and wound bed preparation with larvae or hydrotherapy; wound bed preparation using antiseptics, applications and dressing products; resection of the chronic wound; oxygen and other gases, compression or negative pressure therapy; products designed to correct aspects of wound biochemistry and cell biology associated with impaired wound healing; application of cells, including platelets and stem cells; bioengineered skin and skin grafts; electrical, electromagnetic, lasers, shockwaves and ultrasound and other systemic therapies, which did not fit in the aforementioned categories. Heterogeneity of studies prevented pooled analysis of results. Of the 2161 papers identified, 30 were selected for grading following full text review. The present report is an update of the earlier IWGDF systematic reviews, and the conclusion is similar: that with the possible exception of negative pressure wound therapy in post-operative wounds, there is little published evidence to justify the use of newer therapies. Analysis of the evidence continues to present difficulties in this field as controlled studies remain few and the majority continue to be of poor methodological quality.

Dressings for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes: an overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus are a common and serious global health issue. Dressings form a key part of ulcer treatment, with clinicians and patients having many different types to choose from. A clear and current overview of current evidence is required to facilitate decision-making regarding dressing use.

OBJECTIVES

To summarize data from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trial evidence on the effectiveness of dressings for healing foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus (DM).

METHODS

We searched the following databases for relevant systematic reviews and associated analyses: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 2); Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE; The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 1); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, 14 April 2015); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 14 April 2015). We also handsearched the Cochrane Wounds Group list of reviews. Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. Complete wound healing was the primary outcome assessed; secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life, adverse events, resource use and dressing performance.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 13 eligible systematic reviews relevant to this overview that contained a total of 17 relevant RCTs. One review reported the results of a network meta-analysis and so presented information on indirect, as well as direct, treatment effects. Collectively the reviews reported findings for 11 different comparisons supported by direct data and 26 comparisons supported by indirect data only. Only four comparisons informed by direct data found evidence of a difference in wound healing between dressing types, but the evidence was assessed as being of low or very low quality (in one case data could not be located and checked). There was also no robust evidence of a difference between dressing types for any secondary outcomes assessed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no robust evidence for differences between wound dressings for any outcome in foot ulcers in people with diabetes (treated in any setting). Practitioners may want to consider the unit cost of dressings, their management properties and patient preference when choosing dressings.

Hydrocolloid dressings for healing diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND

Foot ulcers in people with diabetes are a prevalent and serious global health issue. Wound dressings are regarded as important components of ulcer treatment, with clinicians and patients having many different types to choose from including hydrocolloid dressings. There is a range of different hydrocolloids available including fibrous-hydrocolloid and hydrocolloid (matrix) dressings. A clear and current overview of current evidence is required to facilitate decision-making regarding dressing use.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of hydrocolloid wound dressings with no dressing or alternative dressings on the healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

SEARCH METHODS

For this first update, in April 2013, we searched the following databases the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that have compared the effects on ulcer healing of hydrocolloid with alternative wound treatments in the treatment of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five studies (535 participants) in the review: these compared hydrocolloids with basic wound contact dressings, foam dressings, alginate dressings and a topical treatment. Meta-analysis of two studies indicated no statistically significant difference in ulcer healing between fibrous-hydrocolloids and basic wound contact dressings: risk ratio 1.01 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.38). One of these studies found that a basic wound contact dressing was more cost-effective than a fibrous-hydrocolloid dressing. One study compared a hydrocolloid-matrix dressing with a foam dressing and found no statistically significant difference in the number of ulcers healed. There was no statistically significant difference in healing between an antimicrobial (silver) fibrous-hydrocolloid dressing and standard alginate dressing; an antimicrobial dressing (iodine-impregnated) and a standard fibrous hydrocolloid dressing or a standard fibrous hydrocolloid dressing and a topical cream containing plant extracts.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently there is no research evidence to suggest that any type of hydrocolloid wound dressing is more effective in healing diabetic foot ulcers than other types of dressing or a topical cream containing plant extracts. Decision makers may wish to consider aspects such as dressing cost and the wound management properties offered by each dressing type e.g. exudate management.

Hydrogel dressings for healing diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND

Foot ulcers in people with diabetes are a prevalent and serious global health issue. Dressings form a key part of ulcer treatment, with clinicians and patients having many different types to choose from including hydrogel dressings. A clear and current overview of current evidence is required to facilitate decision-making regarding dressing use.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of hydrogel wound dressings compared with alternative dressings or none on the healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

SEARCH METHODS

For this first update, in April 2013, we searched the following databases the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that have compared the effects on ulcer healing of hydrogel with alternative wound dressings or no dressing in the treatment of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five studies (446 participants) in this review. Meta analysis of three studies comparing hydrogel dressings with basic wound contract dressings found significantly greater healing with hydrogel: risk ratio (RR) 1.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27 to 2.56. The three pooled studies had different follow-up times (12 weeks, 16 weeks and 20 weeks) and also evaluated ulcers of different severities (grade 3 and 4; grade 2 and grade unspecified). One study compared a hydrogel dressing with larval therapy and found no statistically significant difference in the number of ulcers healed and another found no statistically significant difference in healing between hydrogel and platelet-derived growth factor. There was also no statistically significant difference in number of healed ulcers between two different brands of hydrogel dressing. All included studies were small and at unclear risk of bias and there was some clinical heterogeneity with studies including different ulcer grades. No included studies compared hydrogel with other advanced wound dressings.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence to suggest that hydrogel dressings are more effective in healing (lower grade) diabetic foot ulcers than basic wound contact dressings however this finding is uncertain due to risk of bias in the original studies. There is currently no research evidence to suggest that hydrogel is more effective than larval therapy or platelet-derived growth factors in healing diabetic foot ulcers, nor that one brand of hydrogel is more effective than another in ulcer healing. No RCTs comparing hydrogel dressings with other advanced dressing types were found.

Alginate dressings for healing diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND

Foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus are a common and serious global health issue. Dressings form a key part of ulcer treatment, with clinicians and patients having many different types to choose from including alginate dressings. A clear and current overview of current evidence is required to facilitate decision-making regarding dressing use.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of alginate wound dressings with no wound dressing or alternative dressings on the healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus.

SEARCH METHODS

For this first update, in April 2013, we searched the following databases the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that have compared the effects on ulcer healing of alginate dressings with alternative wound dressings or no dressing in the treatment of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies (375 participants) in this review; these compared alginate dressings with basic wound contact dressings, foam dressings and a silver-containing, fibrous-hydrocolloid dressing. Meta analysis of two studies found no statistically significant difference between alginate dressings and basic wound contact dressings: risk ratio (RR) 1.09 (95% CI 0.66 to 1.80). Pooled data from two studies comparing alginate dressings with foam dressings found no statistically significant difference in ulcer healing (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.08). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of diabetic foot ulcers healed when an anti-microbial (silver) hydrocolloid dressing was compared with a standard alginate dressing (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.47). All studies had short follow-up times (six to 12 weeks), and small sample sizes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently there is no research evidence to suggest that alginate wound dressings are more effective in healing foot ulcers in people with diabetes than other types of dressing however many trials in this field are very small. Decision makers may wish to consider aspects such as dressing cost and the wound management properties offered by each dressing type e.g. exudate management.

Foam dressings for healing diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND

Foot ulcers in people with diabetes are a prevalent and serious global health issue. Dressings form a key part of ulcer treatment, with clinicians and patients having many different types to choose from. A clear and current overview of current evidence is required to facilitate decision-making regarding dressing use.

OBJECTIVES

The review aimed to evaluate the effects of foam wound dressings on the healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

SEARCH METHODS

For this first update we searched the following databases the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL in April 2013. There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects on ulcer healing of one or more foam wound dressings in the treatment of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies (157 participants) in this review. Meta analysis of two studies indicated that foam dressings do not promote the healing of diabetic foot ulcers compared with basic wound contact dressings (RR 2.03, 95%CI 0.91 to 4.55). Pooled data from two studies comparing foam and alginate dressing found no statistically significant difference in ulcer healing (RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.44). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of diabetic foot ulcers healed when foam dressings were compared with hydrocolloid (matrix) dressings. All included studies were small and/or had limited follow-up times.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently there is no research evidence to suggest that foam wound dressings are more effective in healing foot ulcers in people with diabetes than other types of dressing however all trials in this field are very small. Decision makers may wish to consider aspects such as dressing cost and the wound management properties offered by each dressing type e.g. exudate management.

Acute and impaired wound healing: pathophysiology and current methods for drug delivery, part 2: role of growth factors in normal and pathological wound healing: therapeutic potential and methods of delivery

This is the second of 2 articles that discuss the biology and pathophysiology of wound healing, reviewing the role that growth factors play in this process and describing the current methods for growth factor delivery into the wound bed.

Systematic review and mixed treatment comparison: dressings to heal diabetic foot ulcers

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Foot ulcers in people with diabetes are a common and serious global health issue. Dressings form a key part of ulcer treatment. Existing systematic reviews are limited by the lack of head-to-head comparisons of alternative dressings in a field where there are several different dressing options. We aimed to determine the relative effects of alternative wound dressings on the healing of diabetic foot ulcers.

METHODS

This study was a systematic review involving Bayesian mixed treatment comparison. We included randomised controlled trials evaluating the effects on diabetic foot ulcer healing of one or more wound dressings. There were no restrictions based on language or publication status.

RESULTS

Fifteen eligible studies, evaluating nine dressing types, were included. Ten direct treatment comparisons were made. Whilst there was increased healing associated with hydrogel and foam dressings compared with basic wound contact materials, these findings were based on data from small studies at unclear or high risk of bias. The mixed treatment comparison suggested that hydrocolloid-matrix dressings were associated with higher odds of ulcer healing than all other dressing types; there was a high degree of uncertainty around these estimates, which were deemed to be of very low quality.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

These findings summarise all available trial evidence regarding the use of dressings to heal diabetic foot ulcers. More expensive dressings may offer no advantages in terms of healing than cheaper basic dressings. In addition, evidence pointing to a difference in favour of 'advanced' dressing types over basic wound contact materials is of low or very low quality.

Plectranthus amboinicus and Centella asiatica Cream for the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers

Effects of a topical cream containing P. amboinicus (Lour.) Spreng. (Lamiaceae) and C. asiatica (L.) Urban (Umbelliferae) were evaluated and compared to effects of hydrocolloid fiber wound dressing for diabetic foot ulcers. A single-center, randomized, controlled, open-label study was conducted. Twenty-four type 1 or type 2 diabetes patients aged 20 years or older with Wagner grade 3 foot ulcers postsurgical debridement were enrolled between October 2008 and December 2009. Twelve randomly assigned patients were treated with WH-1 cream containing P. amboinicus and C. asiatica twice daily for two weeks. Another 12 patients were treated with hydrocolloid fiber dressings changed at 7 days or when clinically indicated. Wound condition and safety were assessed at days 7 and 14 and results were compared between groups. No statistically significant differences were seen in percent changes in wound size at 7- and 14-day assessments of WH-1 cream and hydrocolloid dressing groups. A slightly higher proportion of patients in the WH-1 cream group (10 of 12; 90.9%) showed Wagner grade improvement compared to the hydrocolloid fiber dressing group but without statistical significance. For treating diabetic foot ulcers, P. amboinicus and C. asiatica cream is a safe alternative to hydrocolloid fiber dressing without significant difference in effectiveness.

Hydrocolloid dressings for healing diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND

Foot ulcers in people with diabetes are a prevalent and serious global health issue. Wound dressings are regarded as important components of ulcer treatment, with clinicians and patients having many different types to choose from including hydrocolloid dressings. There is a range of different hydrocolloids available including fibrous-hydrocolloid and hydrocolloid (matrix) dressings. A clear and current overview of current evidence is required to facilitate decision-making regarding dressing use.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of hydrocolloid wound dressings with no dressing or alternative dressings on the healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 4 January 2012); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 4); Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to December Week 3 2011); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, January 03, 2012); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 2011 Week 52); and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 30 December 2011). There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that have compared the effects on ulcer healing of hydrocolloid with alternative wound dressings or no dressing in the treatment of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four studies (511 participants) in the review: these compared hydrocolloids with basic wound contact dressings, foam dressings and alginate dressings. Meta-analysis of two studies indicated no statistically significant difference in ulcer healing between fibrous-hydrocolloids and basic wound contact dressings: risk ratio 1.01 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.38). One of these studies found that a basic wound contact dressing was more cost-effective than a fibrous-hydrocolloid dressing. One study compared a hydrocolloid-matrix dressing with a foam dressing and found no statistically significant difference in the number of ulcers healed. There was no statistically significant difference in healing between an antimicrobial (silver) fibrous-hydrocolloid dressing and standard alginate dressing; or an antimicrobial dressing (iodine-impregnated) and a standard fibrous hydrocolloid dressing.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently there is no research evidence to suggest that any type of hydrocolloid wound dressing is more effective in healing diabetic foot ulcers than other types of dressing. Decision makers may wish to consider aspects such as dressing cost and the wound management properties offered by each dressing type e.g. exudate management.

Alginate dressings for healing diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND

Foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus are a common and serious global health issue. Dressings form a key part of ulcer treatment, with clinicians and patients having many different types to choose from including alginate dressings. A clear and current overview of current evidence is required to facilitate decision-making regarding dressing use.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of alginate wound dressings with no wound dressing or alternative dressings on the healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 4 January 2012); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 4); Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to December Week 3 2011); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, January 03, 2012); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 2011 Week 52); and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 30 December 2011). There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that have compared the effects on ulcer healing of alginate dressings with alternative wound dressings or no dressing in the treatment of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies (375 participants) in this review; these compared alginate dressings with basic wound contact dressings, foam dressings and a silver-containing, fibrous-hydrocolloid dressing. Meta analysis of two studies found no statistically significant difference between alginate dressings and basic wound contact dressings: risk ratio (RR) 1.09 (95% CI 0.66 to 1.80). Pooled data from two studies comparing alginate dressings with foam dressings found no statistically significant difference in ulcer healing (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.08). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of diabetic foot ulcers healed when an anti-microbial (silver) hydrocolloid dressing was compared with a standard alginate dressing (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.47). All studies had short follow-up times (six to 12 weeks), and small sample sizes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently there is no research evidence to suggest that alginate wound dressings are more effective in healing foot ulcers in people with diabetes than other types of dressing however many trials in this field are very small. Decision makers may wish to consider aspects such as dressing cost and the wound management properties offered by each dressing type e.g. exudate management.

Foam dressings for healing diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND

Foot ulcers in people with diabetes are a prevalent and serious global health issue. Dressings form a key part of ulcer treatment, with clinicians and patients having many different types to choose from. A clear and current overview of current evidence is required to facilitate decision-making regarding dressing use.

OBJECTIVES

The review aimed to evaluate the effects of foam wound dressings on the healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 10 June 2011); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2); Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to June Week 1 2011); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, 8 June, 2011); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 2011 Week 22); EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 3 June 2011). There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects on ulcer healing of one or more foam wound dressings in the treatment of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies (157 participants) in this review. Meta analysis of two studies indicated that foam dressings do not promote the healing of diabetic foot ulcers compared with basic wound contact dressings (RR 2.03, 95%CI 0.91 to 4.55). Pooled data from two studies comparing foam and alginate dressing found no statistically significant difference in ulcer healing (RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.44). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of diabetic foot ulcers healed when foam dressings were compared with hydrocolloid (matrix) dressings. All included studies were small and/or had limited follow-up times.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently there is no research evidence to suggest that foam wound dressings are more effective in healing foot ulcers in people with diabetes than other types of dressing however all trials in this field are very small. Decision makers may wish to consider aspects such as dressing cost and the wound management properties offered by each dressing type e.g. exudate management.

Hydrogel dressings for healing diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND

Foot ulcers in people with diabetes are a prevalent and serious global health issue. Dressings form a key part of ulcer treatment, with clinicians and patients having many different types to choose from including hydrogel dressings. A clear and current overview of current evidence is required to facilitate decision-making regarding dressing use.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of hydrogel wound dressings compared with alternative dressings or none on the healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 10 June 2011); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2); Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to June Week 1 2011); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, June 8, 2011); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 2011 Week 22) and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 3 June 2011). There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that have compared the effects on ulcer healing of hydrogel with alternative wound dressings or no dressing in the treatment of foot ulcers in people with diabetes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five studies (446 participants) in this review. Meta analysis of three studies comparing hydrogel dressings with basic wound contract dressings found significantly greater healing with hydrogel: risk ratio (RR) 1.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27 to 2.56. The three pooled studies had different follow-up times (12 weeks, 16 weeks and 20 weeks) and also evaluated ulcers of different severities (grade 3 and 4; grade 2 and grade unspecified). One study compared a hydrogel dressing with larval therapy and found no statistically significant difference in the number of ulcers healed and another found no statistically significant difference in healing between hydrogel and platelet-derived growth factor. There was also no statistically significant difference in number of healed ulcers between two different brands of hydrogel dressing. All included studies were small and at unclear risk of bias and there was some clinical heterogeneity with studies including different ulcer grades. No included studies compared hydrogel with other advanced wound dressings.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence to suggest that hydrogel dressings are more effective in healing (lower grade) diabetic foot ulcers than basic wound contact dressings however this finding is uncertain due to risk of bias in the original studies. There is currently no research evidence to suggest that hydrogel is more effective than larval therapy or platelet-derived growth factors in healing diabetic foot ulcers, nor that one brand of hydrogel is more effective than another in ulcer healing. No RCTs comparing hydrogel dressings with other advanced dressing types were found.

Review Paper: Basic Concepts to Novel Therapies: A Review of the Diabetic Foot

Diabetes mellitus is a global epidemic. Peripheral neuropathy and peripheral vascular disease are complications of diabetes mellitus and the primary causative factors for foot ulceration. Foot ulceration is the leading cause of hospitalization in people with diabetes mellitus. The burden of foot ulceration on health care systems and individual patients is immense. Despite conventional treatment, there persists a high incidence of amputation. A multidisciplinary approach is required to prevent ulcers. This review describes the etiology and risk factors for diabetic foot ulceration and a system for evaluating the diabetic foot. The assessment of neuropathy and the grading of foot ulcers are critically examined. This is important to allow for standardization in clinical trials. The management of diabetic foot syndrome is reviewed. The treatments to ensure vascular supply to the lower limb and control of infection as well as novel therapies, which are becoming available to treat nonhealing, “no-option” diabetic ulcers, are discussed.

Debridement of diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND

Foot ulceration is thought to affect 15% of people with diabetes at some time in their lives. Debridement is widely regarded as an effective intervention to speed up ulcer healing. The most effective method is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of debridement interventions on the healing of diabetic foot ulcers.

SEARCH STRATEGY

For this third update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (June 2009); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) - The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 2; Ovid MEDLINE - 1950 to June Week 3 2009; Ovid EMBASE - 1980 to 2009 Week 25 and Ovid CINAHL - 1982 to June Week 3 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating any method of debriding diabetic foot ulcers and measuring complete healing or rate of healing. There was no restriction on articles/trials based on language or publication status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and assessment of study quality were undertaken by one review author and checked by an Editor of the Wounds Group.

MAIN RESULTS

Six RCTs of debridement were identified: four assessed hydrogels, with an additional study evaluating larval therapy against hydrogel and one evaluated surgical debridement. Pooling the three RCTs which compared hydrogel with gauze or standard care suggested that hydrogels are significantly more effective in healing diabetic foot ulcers (Relative Risk 1.84, 95% Confidence Interval (CI)1.3 to 2.61). Surgical debridement showed no significant benefit over standard treatment. One small trial suggested that larvae resulted in a more than 50% reduction in wound area compared with hydrogel. Other debridement methods such as enzyme preparations or polysaccharide beads have not been evaluated in diabetic foot ulcers.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence to suggest that hydrogel increases the healing rate of diabetic foot ulcers compared with gauze dressings or standard care and larval therapy resulted in significantly greater reduction in wound area than hydrogel. More research is needed to evaluate the effects of a range of widely used debridement methods and of debridement per se.

Comparison of the ionic silver-containing hydrofiber and paraffin gauze dressing on split-thickness skin graft donor sites

The split-thickness skin graft (STSG) donor site dressing has been an inconclusive topic. Each of the Hydrofiber (Aquacel, ConvaTec A Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Deeside, UK) and silver dressings have applied in many types of wound care with favorable outcomes. Our study compared the ionic silver-containing Hydrofiber dressing and paraffin gauze dressing. The subjects were randomized into group A: ionic silver-containing Hydrofiber and group B: paraffin gauze. From February 2006 to 2007, 20 donor sites were recorded. The mean donor site surface area was 145.5 cm2 (group A) and 135.8 cm2 (group B). The completed re-epithelization day was 7.90 and 11.20 days, respectively (P = 0.031). The average pain score at rest were 0.74 and 0.80, respectively (P = 0.894). The average pain score on dressing removal were 3.12 and 4.70, respectively (P = 0.027). There was no infection or seroma in both groups. In conclusion, ionic silver-containing Hydrofiber dressing can reduce STSG donor site pain and promote re-epithelization compared to paraffin gauze dressing.

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.

Minimising wound-related pain at dressing change: evidence-informed practice

Pain is a common concern in patients with chronic wounds. The purpose of this article is to inform clinicians of empirical evidence for practice based on a recent published consensus document on wound related pain. A team approach is needed to address the experience of living with wound related pain within a holistic framework. The importance of regular pain assessment and strategies to minimize traumatic during wound care are highlighted.

A systematic review of the effectiveness of interventions to enhance the healing of chronic ulcers of the foot in diabetes

The outcome of management of diabetic foot ulcers is poor and there is uncertainty concerning optimal approaches to management. We have undertaken a systematic review to identify interventions for which there is evidence of effectiveness. A search was made for reports of the effectiveness of interventions assessed in terms of healing, ulcer area or amputation in controlled clinical studies published prior to December 2006. Methodological quality of selected studies was independently assessed by two reviewers using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) criteria. Selected studies fell into the following categories: sharp debridement and larvae; antiseptics and dressings; chronic wound resection; hyperbaric oxygen (HBO); reduction of tissue oedema; skin grafts; electrical and magnetic stimulation and ultrasound. Heterogeneity of studies prevented pooled analysis of results. Of the 2251 papers identified, 60 were selected for grading following full text review. Some evidence was found to support hydrogels as desloughing agents and to suggest that a systemic (HBO) therapy may be effective. Topical negative pressure (TNP) may promote healing of post-operative wounds, and resection of neuropathic plantar ulcers may be beneficial. More information was needed to confirm the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these and other interventions. No data were found to justify the use of any other topically applied product or dressing, including those with antiseptic properties. Further evidence to substantiate the effect of interventions designed to enhance the healing of chronic ulcers is urgently needed. Until such evidence is available from robust trials, there is limited justification for the use of more expensive treatments and dressings.

Aminated beta-1,3-D-glucan improves wound healing in diabetic db/db mice

Delayed wound healing in diabetes is caused by neuropathy, vascular changes, and impaired cellular response to the injury. Macrophages are crucial in normal wound healing, and impaired functions of these cells have been shown in diabetes. beta-1,3-D-glucans stimulate macrophage function. This open-label study was performed to see if aminated beta-1,3-D-glucan (AG) stimulates wound healing in diabetes. Four groups (1-4) of diabetic db/db mice and one nondiabetic control group, db/+(5) were studied: group 1 (n=11): topical AG; group 2 (n=10): topical AG and subcutaneous insulin; group 3 (n=14): topical placebo and subcutaneous insulin; group 4 (n=10): diabetic control (placebo); group 5 (n=12): normal control (placebo). At the end of the experiments fasting blood glucose and A1C were (mean +/- SE) as follows: Group 1: 30.5 +/- 1.9 mmol/L and 11.3 +/- 0.6%; group 2: 12.0 +/- 1.7 mmol/L and 8.0 +/- 0.6%; group 3: 15.4 +/- 2.4 mmol/L and 7.4 +/- 0.3%; group 4: 32.6 +/- 2.6 mmol/L and 12.3 +/- 0.6%; group 5: 7.2 +/- 0.4 mmol/L and 3.9 +/- 0.04%, respectively. The closed wound area was the same in group 1 (AG alone) and group 2 (AG plus insulin) after 17 days, 57.3 +/- 4.7 vs. 50.1 +/- 4.9% (p=0.7). The results of these two groups were superior to group 3 (insulin treatment alone, 32.0 +/- 4.3%, p<0.001) and diabetic controls (38.2 +/- 5.1%, p=0.001). The macrophage-stimulant AG improves wound healing in db/db mice.

Prospective randomized controlled study of Hydrofiber dressing containing ionic silver or calcium alginate dressings in non-ischaemic diabetic foot ulcers

AIMS

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are at risk of infection and impaired healing, placing patients at risk of lower extremity amputation. DFU care requires debridement and dressings. A prospective, multicentre study compared clinical efficacy and safety of AQUACEL Hydrofiber dressings containing ionic silver (AQAg) with those of Algosteril calcium alginate (CA) dressings in managing out-patients with Type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus and non-ischaemic Wagner Grade 1 or 2 DFUs.

METHODS

Patients stratified by antibiotic use on enrolment were randomly assigned to similar protocols including off-loading, AQAg (n = 67) or CA (n = 67) primary dressings and secondary foam dressings for 8 weeks or until healing. Clinical efficacy measures were healing outcomes and primarily healing speed. Adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

AQAg and CA groups were comparable at baseline. All ulcer healing outcomes improved in both groups. The mean time to healing was 53 days for AQAg ulcers and 58 days for CA ulcers (P = 0.34). AQAg-treated ulcers reduced in depth nearly twice as much as CA-treated ulcers (0.25 cm vs. 0.13 cm; P = 0.04). There was more overall ulcer improvement and less deterioration in AQAg subjects (P = 0.058), particularly in the subset initially using antibiotics (P = 0.02). Safety profiles of both groups were similar.

CONCLUSION

When added to standard care with appropriate off-loading, AQAg silver dressings were associated with favourable clinical outcomes compared with CA dressings, specifically in ulcer depth reduction and in infected ulcers requiring antibiotic treatment. This study reports the first significant clinical effects of a primary wound dressing containing silver on DFU healing.

New and experimental approaches to treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: a comprehensive review of emerging treatment strategies

Diabetic foot ulcers occur in up to 15% of all diabetic patients and are a leading cause of nontraumatic amputation worldwide. Neuropathy, abnormal foot biomechanics, peripheral vascular disease and external trauma are the major contributors to the development of a foot ulcer in the diabetic patient. Therapy today includes repeated debridement, offloading, and dressings, for lower grade ulcers, and broad spectrum antibiotics and occasionally limited or complete amputation for higher grades, requiring a team effort of health care workers from various specialties. The large population affected by diabetic foot ulcers and the high rates of failure ending with amputation even with the best therapeutic regimens, have resulted in the development of new therapies and are the focus of this review. These include new off loading techniques, dressings from various materials, methods to promote wound closure using artificial skin grafts, different growth factors or wound bed modulators and methods of debridement. These new techniques are promising but still mostly unproven and traditional approaches cannot be replaced. New and generally more expensive therapies should be seen as adding to traditional approaches.

Open surgical wounds: how does Aquacel compare with wet-to-dry gauze?

OBJECTIVE

To compare the healing rates of a hydrofibre dressing (Aquacel) and normal wet-to-dry gauze in the treatment of open surgical wounds.

METHOD

Fifty patients with open surgical wounds were randomized to receive either saline-moistened gauze or Aquacel. The rate of wound healing was measured as ml/day (deep wounds) or cm2/day (superficial wounds) at each dressing change until an investigator blinded to the patient group diagnosed the wounds as having healed or the patient was withdrawn from the study.

RESULTS

Of the 50 patients, seven were withdrawn from the study after the first evaluation. Of the remaining 43 patients, 21 had been randomly allocated to the gauze group and 22 to the Aquacel group. For deep wounds, a mean change in the wound healing rate of 1.9 +/- 1.3 cm3/day was reported for the gauze group and 2.9 +/- 2.3 cm3/day for the Aquacel group. These results approach statistical significance (p = 0.082). For superficial wounds, the mean change in the healing rate was 1.6 +/- 1.5 cm2/day for the gauze group and 1.9 +/- 2.2 cm2/day for the Aquacel group, but this was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Aquacel appears to be at least as effective as wet-to-dry gauze in the healing of open surgical wounds.

Carboxymethylcellulose coated on visceral face of polypropylene mesh prevents adhesion without impairing wound healing in incisional hernia model in rats

Adhesions between viscera and mesh may result in intestinal obstruction and fistulae formation. Fewer adhesions with sodium carboxymethylcellulose (SCMC)-coated polypropylene mesh (PM) has been reported, but impaired wound healing was the major concern. We investigated the adhesion-prevention effect of SCMC in different concentrations, as coating only on visceral face of PM and its effects on wound healing. A full-thickness abdominal wall defect was created in 28 rats, which were then divided into three groups. In Group I (control), the defect was repaired with PM only; in Group II and Group III, the defects were repaired with 1% and 1.6% SCMC-coated-PM, respectively. All animals were sacrificed at day 30, and histological evaluation and adhesion scoring were done. Animals in the group in which 1.6% SCMC-coated PM was used developed significantly fewer adhesions compared with other animals (P=0.04). Histological evaluation using a semiquantitative scoring system showed no difference between the groups in fibrosis and inflammation scores (P=0.9 and P=0.3, respectively), and thickness of fibrosis on mesh was also similar (P=0.5). SCMC in 1.6% concentration as coating only on the visceral face of PM reduced the incidence and severity of adhesions without impairing wound healing.

Debridement of diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND

Foot ulceration is thought to affect 15% of people with diabetes at some time in their lives.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review is to assess the evidence for the effectiveness of debridement as a treatment for diabetic foot ulcers.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Searches of electronic databases, hand searching journals, bibliographies and identification of unpublished work by written communication with recognised experts in the diabetic foot.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials evaluating a method of debridement in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. The outcome had to include either complete healing or rate of healing. There was no restriction on articles/trials based on language or publication status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and assessment of study quality were undertaken by one reviewer and checked by an Editor of the Wounds Group.

MAIN RESULTS

5 RCTs of debridement were identified; 3 RCTs assessed the effectiveness of a hydrogel as a debridement method, 1 RCT evaluated surgical debridement and 1 RCT evaluated larval therapy. Pooling the 3 hydrogel RCTs suggested that hydrogels are significantly more effective than gauze or standard care in healing diabetic foot ulcers (absolute risk difference 0.23; 95% CI: 0.10,0.36). Surgical debridement and larval therapy showed no significant benefit in these small trials. Other debridement methods such as enzyme preparations or polysaccharide beads have not been evaluated in RCTs of people with diabetes.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence to suggest that hydrogel increases the healing rate of diabetic foot ulcers. More research is needed to evaluate the effects of a range of widely used debridement methods and of debridement per se.