Diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections

Management of diabetic foot ulcers: a narrative review

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are among the most serious complications of diabetes and are a source of reduced quality of life and financial burden for the people involved. For effective DFU management, an evidence-based treatment strategy that considers the patient's clinical context and wound condition is required. This treatment strategy should include conventional practices (surgical debridement, antibiotics, vascular assessment, offloading, and amputation) coordinated by interdisciplinary DFU experts. In addition, several adjuvant therapies can be considered for nonhealing wounds. In this narrative review, we aim to highlight the current trends in DFU management and review the up-to-date guidelines.

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.

Surgery for diabetic foot infections

Diabetes mellitus is a common disease in the world today and its prevalence is increasing. Foot and ankle complications, including infection, are the most common reason for hospital admission in patients with diabetes mellitus in the United States and are commonly encountered by the foot and ankle surgeon. Thorough clinical examination with appropriate use of adjunctive laboratory and imaging studies can allow for early diagnosis and treatment, which can improve patient outcomes. Mild infections can often be treated on an outpatient basis with oral antibiotics and local debridement, whereas more severe infections require hospitalization, intravenous antibiotics, and surgical debridement to fully eradicate the infection. Despite proper treatment, amputation is still common in diabetics.

Assessment and treatment of diabetic foot ulcer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Foot ulcers are one of the main complications in diabetes mellitus, with a 15% lifetime risk in all diabetic patients. The rate of lower extremity amputation among diabetic patients is 17-40 times higher than in non-diabetics. A critical triad of neuropathy, minor foot trauma and foot deformity was found in > 63% of diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). Peripheral vascular disease (PVD) has been identified in 30% of foot ulcers. We present a comprehensive assessment and the treatment of DFUs. We also want to notify physicians not to ignore foot assessment and examinations in patients with diabetes.

METHODS

We conducted this study on DFU on the basis of: pathogenesis and risk factors, assessment and physical examination, paraclinic assessment, treatment, cost and mortality and prevention.

RESULTS AND FINDINGS

Approximately 20% of hospital admissions among diabetic patients are the result of foot problems. Diabetic foot assessment should include dermatological, vascular, neurological and musculoskeletal systems. There are three basic treatments for management of DFU: (i) debridement; (ii) antibiotics and (iii) revascularization. The cost to treat one simple ulcer is $5000 to $8000.

CONCLUSION

Awareness of physicians about foot problems in diabetic patients, clinical examination and paraclinical assessment, regular foot examination, patient education, simple hygienic practices and provision of appropriate footwear combined with prompt treatment of minor injuries can decrease ulcer occurrence by 50%.

Diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: 1. Foot infections in patients with diabetes cause substantial morbidity and frequent visits to health care professionals and may lead to amputation of a lower extremity. 2. Diabetic foot infections require attention to local (foot) and systemic (metabolic) issues and coordinated management, preferably by a multidisciplinary foot-care team (A-II). The team managing these infections should include, or have ready access to, an infectious diseases specialist or a medical microbiologist (B-II). 3. The major predisposing factor to these infections is foot ulceration, which is usually related to peripheral neuropathy. Peripheral vascular disease and various immunological disturbances play a secondary role. 4. Aerobic Gram-positive cocci (especially Staphylococcus aureus) are the predominant pathogens in diabetic foot infections. Patients who have chronic wounds or who have recently received antibiotic therapy may also be infected with Gram-negative rods, and those with foot ischemia or gangrene may have obligate anaerobic pathogens. 5. Wound infections must be diagnosed clinically on the basis of local (and occasionally systemic) signs and symptoms of inflammation. Laboratory (including microbiological) investigations are of limited use for diagnosing infection, except in cases of osteomyelitis (B-II). 6. Send appropriately obtained specimens for culture before starting empirical antibiotic therapy in all cases of infection, except perhaps those that are mild and previously untreated (B-III). Tissue specimens obtained by biopsy, ulcer curettage, or aspiration are preferable to wound swab specimens (A-I). 7. Imaging studies may help diagnose or better define deep, soft-tissue purulent collections and are usually needed to detect pathological findings in bone. Plain radiography may be adequate in many cases, but MRI (in preference to isotope scanning) is more sensitive and specific, especially for detection of soft-tissue lesions (A-I). 8. Infections should be categorized by their severity on the basis of readily assessable clinical and laboratory features (B-II). Most important among these are the specific tissues involved, the adequacy of arterial perfusion, and the presence of systemic toxicity or metabolic instability. Categorization helps determine the degree of risk to the patient and the limb and, thus, the urgency and venue of management. 9. Available evidence does not support treating clinically uninfected ulcers with antibiotic therapy (D-III). Antibiotic therapy is necessary for virtually all infected wounds, but it is often insufficient without appropriate wound care. 10. Select an empirical antibiotic regimen on the basis of the severity of the infection and the likely etiologic agent(s) (B-II). Therapy aimed solely at aerobic Gram-positive cocci may be sufficient for mild-to-moderate infections in patients who have not recently received antibiotic therapy (A-II). Broad-spectrum empirical therapy is not routinely required but is indicated for severe infections, pending culture results and antibiotic susceptibility data (B-III). Take into consideration any recent antibiotic therapy and local antibiotic susceptibility data, especially the prevalence of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) or other resistant organisms. Definitive therapy should be based on both the culture results and susceptibility data and the clinical response to the empirical regimen (C-III). 11. There is only limited evidence with which to make informed choices among the various topical, oral, and parenteral antibiotic agents. Virtually all severe and some moderate infections require parenteral therapy, at least initially (C-III). Highly bioavailable oral antibiotics can be used in most mild and in many moderate infections, including some cases of osteomyelitis (A-II). Topical therapy may be used for some mild superficial infections (B-I). 12. Continue antibiotic therapy until there is evidence that the infection has resolved but not necessarily until a wound has healed. Suggestions for the duration of antibiotic therapy are as follows: for mild infections, 12 weeks usually suffices, but some require an additional 12 weeks; for moderate and severe infections, usually 24 weeks is sufficient, depending on the structures involved, the adequacy of debridement, the type of soft-tissue wound cover, and wound vascularity (A-II); and for osteomyelitis, generally at least 46 weeks is required, but a shorter duration is sufficient if the entire infected bone is removed, and probably a longer duration is needed if infected bone remains (B-II). 13. If an infection in a clinically stable patient fails to respond to 1 antibiotic courses, consider discontinuing all antimicrobials and, after a few days, obtaining optimal culture specimens (C-III). 14. Seek surgical consultation and, when needed, intervention for infections accompanied by a deep abscess, extensive bone or joint involvement, crepitus, substantial necrosis or gangrene, or necrotizing fasciitis (A-II). Evaluating the limb's arterial supply and revascularizing when indicated are particularly important. Surgeons with experience and interest in the field should be recruited by the foot-care team, if possible. 15. Providing optimal wound care, in addition to appropriate antibiotic treatment of the infection, is crucial for healing (A-I). This includes proper wound cleansing, debridement of any callus and necrotic tissue, and, especially, off-loading of pressure. There is insufficient evidence to recommend use of a specific wound dressing or any type of wound healing agents or products for infected foot wounds. 16. Patients with infected wounds require early and careful follow-up observation to ensure that the selected medical and surgical treatment regimens have been appropriate and effective (B-III). 17. Studies have not adequately defined the role of most adjunctive therapies for diabetic foot infections, but systematic reviews suggest that granulocyte colony-stimulating factors and systemic hyperbaric oxygen therapy may help prevent amputations (B-I). These treatments may be useful for severe infections or for those that have not adequately responded to therapy, despite correcting for all amenable local and systemic adverse factors. 18. Spread of infection to bone (osteitis or osteomyelitis) may be difficult to distinguish from noninfectious osteoarthropathy. Clinical examination and imaging tests may suffice, but bone biopsy is valuable for establishing the diagnosis of osteomyelitis, for defining the pathogenic organism(s), and for determining the antibiotic susceptibilities of such organisms (B-II). 19. Although this field has matured, further research is much needed. The committee especially recommends that adequately powered prospective studies be undertaken to elucidate and validate systems for classifying infection, diagnosing osteomyelitis, defining optimal antibiotic regimens in various situations, and clarifying the role of surgery in treating osteomyelitis (A-III).

An integrated care pathway to save the critically ischaemic diabetic foot

This prospective study describes and evaluates the efficacy of an integrated care pathway for the management of the critically ischaemic diabetic foot patients by a multidisciplinary team. A weekly joint diabetes/vascular/podiatry ward round and outpatient clinic was established where patients were assessed within 7 days of referral by clinical examination, ankle-brachial-index-pressures, duplex angiogram and transcutaneous oxygen pressures. An angiogram +/- angioplasty or alternatively a magnetic resonance angiography prior to surgical revascularisation was performed in patients deemed not suitable for angioplasty based on the above vascular assessment. Between January 2002 and June 2003(18 months), 128 diabetic patients with lower limb ischaemia were seen. Thirty-four (26.6%) patients received medical treatment alone, and 18 (14.1%) were deemed 'palliative' due to their significant co-morbidities. The remaining 76 (59.4%) patients underwent either angioplasty (n = 56), surgical reconstruction (n = 18), primary major amputation (n = 2) or secondary amputation after surgical revascularisation (n = 1). Minor toe amputations were required in 35 patients. The mortality in the intervention group was 14% (11/76). This integrated multidisciplinary approach offers a consistent and equitable service to diabetic patients with critically ischaemic feet and appears to have a beneficial major/minor amputation ratio.

Optimal treatment of infected diabetic foot ulcers

Foot ulceration can lead to devastating consequences in diabetic patients. They are not only associated with increased morbidity but also mortality. Foot infections result as a consequence of foot ulceration, which can occasionally lead to deep tissue infections and osteomyelitis; both of which can result in loss of limb. To prevent amputations prompt diagnosis and treatment is required. Understanding the pathology of the diabetic foot will help in the planning of appropriate investigations and treatment. Clinical diagnosis of infection is based on the presence of discharge from the ulcer, cellulitis, warmth and signs of toxicity; though the latter is uncommon. Deep tissue samples from the ulcer and/or blood cultures should be taken before, but without delaying the start of antibacterial treatment in limb and life-threatening infections. In milder infections wound sampling may direct appropriate antibacterial treatment. Staphylococcus aureus, followed by streptococci are the most common organisms causing infection and antibacterial treatment should be targeted against these organisms in mild infection possibly with monotherapy. But in serious infections combination therapy is required because these are usually caused by multiple organisms including anaerobes. Drug-resistant organisms are becoming more prevalent and methicillin-resistant infections can be treated effectively with a number of oral antibacterials either as monotherapy or in combination. Surgical treatment with debridement, for example, callus removal or drainage of pus form an important part of diabetic foot ulcer management especially in the presence of infection. Occasionally limited surgery including dead infected bone removal may be necessary for resolution of infection. Amputation is sometimes required as a last resort for limb or life preservation.

Common Fungal Infections of the Feet in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus

Superficial fungal infections of the foot (tinea pedis and onychomycosis) are common among elderly patients. Although most authorities believe that patients with diabetes mellitus have an increased predisposition to dermatophytic infections, some controversies still remain. Because these infections disrupt the skin integrity and provide an avenue for bacterial superinfection, elderly diabetic patients with dermatophytic infection should be promptly treated with an antifungal agent. For most dermatophytic infections of the foot, topical agents are usually effective and less expensive than oral agents. Laboratory diagnosis of fungal infection prior to institution of therapy is recommended. Proper technique for obtaining the specimen is important to ensure a higher chance of isolating the infecting fungus. Commonly used anti-dermatophytic agents that are also active against the yeasts include the imidazoles, the allylamines-benzylamines and the hydroxypyridones, which are also effective against most of the moulds. Oral therapy for tinea pedis, although not well studied, should be limited to patients with more extensive infections, such as vesicobullous and moccasin type, resistant infections or chronic infections. In addition, oral agents should also be considered in diabetic and immunosuppressed patients. On the other hand, treatment of onychomycosis of the foot usually requires systemic therapy. Griseofulvin is the least effective agent when compared with the newer agents. Terbinafine, itraconazole and fluconazole have been shown to have acceptable cure rates. More recently, topical treatment of the nail with 8% ciclopirox nail lacquer, bifonazole with urea and amorolfine have been reported to be successful. Over the past decade, fungal foot infections of the skin and nail are more effectively treated with the introduction of numerous topical and oral agents.

An evidence-based approach to diabetic foot infections

Foot infections are a major complication of diabetes mellitus and contribute to the development of gangrene and lower extremity amputation. Recent evidence indicates that persons with diabetes are at greater risk for infection because of underlying neuropathy, peripheral vascular disease, and impaired responses to infecting organisms. This article reviews the underlying pathophysiology, causes, microbiology, and current management concepts for this potentially limb-threatening complication. Multidisciplinary management consisting of teams of specialists with a focus on limb preservation can make significant improvements in outcomes, including a reduction in rates of lower extremity amputation.

Regional musculoskeletal conditions: foot and ankle disorders

Foot pain is very common, especially in women, owing to inappropriate footwear. Overuse, repetitive strain and minor, easily forgettable injuries may result in chronic foot and ankle pain. Rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthropathies and gout frequently affect the foot, often as a first presentation. Charcot's joints and foot infections are not rare in diabetes. The rheumatologist should be familiar with foot disorders, either localized or as manifestations of generalized disease. History taking, physical examination, identification of the source of pain by intra-articularly given local anaesthetics and imaging methods should be used to reveal the underlying disorder. Correct diagnosis and efficient therapy-including local steroid injections, physiotherapy, orthoses, surgery-are necessary not only for treatment but also for preventing biomechanical chain reactions. This chapter gives an overview of the epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment of foot pain and foot disorders caused by both local and generalized diseases.