Use of a purified reconstituted bilayer matrix in the management of chronic diabetic foot ulcers improves patient outcomes vs standard of care: Results of a prospective randomised controlled multi-centre clinical trial

Tailored bioengineering and nanomedicine strategies for sex-specific healing of chronic wounds

Chronic wounds, defined by their prolonged healing process, significantly impair patients' quality of life and impose a hefty financial burden on healthcare systems worldwide. Sex- and gender-specific mechanisms regulate inflammation and infection, angiogenesis, matrix synthesis and cell recruitment. All of these processes contribute to cutaneous wound healing but remain largely understudied. This review aims to spotlight the innovative realm of bioengineering and nanomedicine, which is at the helm of revolutionizing complex chronic wound care. It underscores the significance of integrating patient sex into the development and (pre)clinical testing of these avant-garde treatment modalities, in order to enhance healing prospects for all patients regardless of sex. Moreover, we explore the representation of male and female patients in clinical trials of bioengineered and nanomedicine products. Finally, we examine the primary reasons for the historical neglect in translating sex-specific wound healing research into clinical practice and propose strategic solutions. By tackling these issues, the article advocates advanced treatment frameworks that could significantly improve healing outcomes for individuals of all sexes, thereby optimizing both efficacy and inclusivity in chronic wound management.

Effectiveness of most common adjuvant wound treatments (skin substitutes, negative pressure wound therapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, platelet-rich plasma/fibrin, and growth factors) for the management of hard-to-heal 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 several adjuvant therapies (AT) commonly used in the treatment of 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.

METHODS

A Medline and Embase search were performed up to May 20th, 2024 collecting all RCTs including diabetic patients or reporting subgroup analyses on diabetic patients with DFU comparing AT with placebo/standard of care (SoC), with a duration of at least 12 weeks. Prespecified endpoints were: ulcer healing (principal), time-to-healing, major and minor amputation, serious adverse events (SAE), and all-cause mortality. AT assessed were: growth factors (GF), Platelet-rich plasma and fibrin (PRP/F), skin substitutes (SS), negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT), and hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). Mantel-Haenzel Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (MH-OR, 95% CIs) were either calculated or extracted directly from the publications. Weighted mean differences and 95% CIs were calculated for continuous variables.

RESULTS

Fifty-one studies fulfilled all inclusion criteria (3, 5, 27, 8, and 8 with GF, PRP/F, SS, NPWT, and HBOT, respectively). Participants treated with any of the explored AT had a significantly higher ulcer healing rate (MH-OR ranging from 2.17 to 4.18) and shorter time-to-healing in comparison with SoC/placebo. Only PRP/F and HBOT showed a significantly lower risk of major amputation (MH-OR: 0.32(0.11;0,93; p = 0.04 and 0.28(0.10;0,79; p = 0.02, respectively), despite a higher risk of SAE. No other significant effects on the above-reported prespecified endpoints were observed. For the primary endpoint, the quality of evidence was rated as "high" for all the AT, except for NPWT ("moderate").

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, AT can actively promote wound healing and shorten time-to-healing in patients with DFU. HBOT and PRP/F also showed a reduction of the risk of major amputation, despite a higher rate of SAE.

An Overview of Recent Clinical Trials for Diabetic Foot Ulcer Therapies

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are a major complication of diabetes, leading to high mortality, reduced quality of life, neuropathy, ischemia, infection, and amputation risks. The prevalence of these ulcers is only on the rise as more people suffer from type 2 diabetes and obesity. The current wound management involves wound dressings, offloading, debridement, and infection control, but more must be done to keep up with the rising prevalence of DFUs and the strain they put on patients and the healthcare system. To find recent therapeutic advances in DFU treatment, we searched PubMed for novel therapeutics from the past 5 years. We found a diversity of promising interventions, including advanced wound dressings and topicals, physical energy-based therapies, regenerative scaffolds, and growth factor- and cell-based therapies. Recent therapies hold significant promise in healing more DFUs faster and more effectively. Providers should consider employing safe, novel therapeutics when standard dressings are not effective.

Systematic Review of Cellular, Acellular, and Matrix-like Products and Indirect Treatment Comparison Between Cellular/Acellular and Amniotic/Nonamniotic Grafts in the Management of Diabetic Foot Ulcers

Significance: This Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-compliant review focuses on the efficacy of cellular, acellular, and matrix-like products (CAMPs) in the management of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) based on published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Recent Advances: Although CAMPs have been incorporated into the clinical algorithm for chronic wounds, evidence is lacking to comparatively evaluate the efficacy of these products. Critical Issues: Level 1 RCT studies are the gold standard to evaluate the efficacy of different treatment approaches; however, due to differences in surgical techniques, patient demographics, and compliance, standard-of-care (SOC) outcomes in the wound care space can vary significantly between different RCTs, making it difficult to compare them against each other. Future Directions: To mitigate variability between different RCTs, wound closure outcomes can be reported as risk ratios (RRs). This review of all the currently published RCTs (with a similar trial design) in patients with DFU and RRs confirms that CAMPs adjunct to SOC result in statistically superior wound closure outcomes in DFUs, when compared with SOC alone, with a RR of 1.72 [1.56, 1.90], p < 0.00001. Enough evidence is still lacking to determine a statistical difference between broad categories of cellular/acellular and amniotic/nonamniotic CAMPs, and hence, decision makers should consider published head-to-head comparative studies, real-world evidence, and cost-effectiveness evidence between individual CAMPs to decide on which to use in practice.

A multicentre clinical trial evaluating the outcomes of two application regimens of a unique keratin-based graft in the treatment of Wagner grade one non-healing diabetic foot ulcers

Diabetic foot complications that lead to lower extremity amputations pose a significant challenge to the entire global health system. In this multicentre clinical trial, 26 patients with chronic Wagner one diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) were treated with a unique human keratin matrix graft applied either weekly or bi-weekly, in addition to standard of care. The hypothesis was that bi-weekly application would be similar to weekly application. The primary endpoint was complete wound closure by 12 weeks, and secondary endpoints included healing time, percent area reduction and weekly changes in peripheral neuropathy, pain and quality of life. In the intent-to-treat population, 77% (10/13) of DFUs treated with bi-weekly application healed compared with 69% (9/13) treated with weekly application. The mean time to heal within 12 weeks in the bi-weekly group was 61 days and in the weekly group was 54 days. The mean percent area reduction at 12 weeks was 94.7% in the bi-weekly group compared with 84.8% in the weekly group. The number of grafts used in the bi-weekly group was 3.9 compared with 6.2 in the weekly group. The results of this trial confirm our hypothesis that whether bi-weekly or weekly application of the unique keratin matrix graft is used to treat nonhealing indolent DFUs, there is a high rate of complete healing. Based on these results, future studies should be conducted that further investigate the use of this novel human keratin matrix graft for the treatment of chronic DFUs.

A purified reconstituted bilayer matrix shows improved outcomes in treatment of non-healing diabetic foot ulcers when compared to the standard of care: Final results and analysis of a prospective, randomized, controlled, multi-centre clinical trial

As the incidence of diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) increases, better treatments that improve healing should reduce complications of these ulcers including infections and amputations. We conducted a randomized controlled trial comparing outcomes between a novel purified reconstituted bilayer membrane (PRBM) to the standard of care (SOC) in the treatment of non-healing DFUs. This study included 105 patients who were randomized to either of two treatment groups (n = 54 PRBM; n = 51 SOC) in the intent to treat (ITT) group and 80 who completed the study per protocol (PP) (n = 47 PRBM; n = 33 SOC). The primary endpoint was the percentage of wounds closed after 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included percent area reduction, time to healing, quality of life, and cost to closure. The DFUs that had been treated with PRBM healed at a higher rate than those treated with SOC (ITT: 83% vs. 45%, p = 0.00004, PP: 92% vs. 67%, p = 0.005). Wounds treated with PRBM also healed significantly faster than those treated with SOC with a mean of 42 versus 62 days for SOC (p = 0.00074) and achieved a mean wound area reduction within 12 weeks of 94% versus 51% for SOC (p = 0.0023). There were no adverse events or serious adverse events that were related to either the PRBM or the SOC. In comparison to the SOC, DFUs healed faster when treated with PRBM. Thus, the use of this PRBM is an effective option for the treatment of chronic DFUs.

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

BACKGROUND

It is critical that interventions used to enhance the healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes are backed by high-quality evidence and cost-effectiveness. In previous years, the systematic review accompanying guidelines published by the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot performed 4-yearly updates of previous searches, including trials of prospective, cross-sectional and case-control design.

AIMS

Due to a need to re-evaluate older studies against newer standards of reporting and assessment of risk of bias, we performed a whole new search from conception, but limiting studies to randomised control trials only.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For this systematic review, we searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases for published studies on randomised control trials of interventions to enhance healing of diabetes-related foot ulcers. We only included trials comparing interventions to standard of care. Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion and assessed relevant outcomes as well as methodological quality.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 22,250 articles, of which 262 were selected for full text review across 10 categories of interventions. Overall, the certainty of evidence for a majority of wound healing interventions was low or very low, with moderate evidence existing for two interventions (sucrose-octasulfate and leucocyte, platelet and fibrin patch) and low quality evidence for a further four (hyperbaric oxygen, topical oxygen, placental derived products and negative pressure wound therapy). The majority of interventions had insufficient evidence.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the evidence to support any other intervention to enhance wound healing is lacking and further high-quality randomised control trials are encouraged.

Guidelines on interventions to enhance healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes (IWGDF 2023 update)

AIMS

Principles of wound management, including debridement, wound bed preparation, and newer technologies involving alternation of wound physiology to facilitate healing, are of utmost importance when attempting to heal a chronic diabetes-related foot ulcer. However, the rising incidence and costs of diabetes-related foot ulcer management necessitate that interventions to enhance wound healing of chronic diabetes-related foot ulcers are supported by high-quality evidence of efficacy and cost effectiveness when used in conjunction with established aspects of gold-standard multidisciplinary care. This is the 2023 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) evidence-based guideline on wound healing interventions to promote healing of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes. It serves as an update of the 2019 IWGDF guideline.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We followed the GRADE approach by devising clinical questions and important outcomes in the Patient-Intervention-Control-Outcome (PICO) format, undertaking a systematic review, developing summary of judgements tables, and writing recommendations and rationale for each question. Each recommendation is based on the evidence found in the systematic review and, using the GRADE summary of judgement items, including desirable and undesirable effects, certainty of evidence, patient values, resources required, cost effectiveness, equity, feasibility, and acceptability, we formulated recommendations that were agreed by the authors and reviewed by independent experts and stakeholders.

RESULTS

From the results of the systematic review and evidence-to-decision making process, we were able to make 29 separate recommendations. We made a number of conditional supportive recommendations for the use of interventions to improve healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes. These include the use of sucrose octasulfate dressings, the use of negative pressure wound therapies for post-operative wounds, the use of placental-derived products, the use of the autologous leucocyte/platelet/fibrin patch, the use of topical oxygen therapy, and the use of hyperbaric oxygen. Although in all cases it was stressed that these should be used where best standard of care was not able to heal the wound alone and where resources were available for the interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

These wound healing recommendations should support improved outcomes for people with diabetes and ulcers of the foot, and we hope that widescale implementation will follow. However, although the certainty of much of the evidence on which to base the recommendations is improving, it remains poor overall. We encourage not more, but better quality trials including those with a health economic analysis, into this area.

Bioengineered Skin for Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Scoping Review

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) pose a significant threat to individuals with diabetes mellitus (DM), such as lower limb amputation and severe morbidity. Bioengineered skin substitutes (BSS) are alternatives to traditional interventions for treating DFUs, but their efficacy compared to standard wound care (SWC) or other treatment types, such as allografts, remains unknown. A scoping review of human studies was conducted to identify current approaches in the treatment of DFUs using BSS as compared with other treatment options. Systematic searches in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were conducted to identify comparative studies that enrolled 10 or more patients and evaluated wound healing outcomes (closure, time-to-healing, and area reduction). Database searches isolated articles published from 1 December 2012 to 1 December 2022 and were conducted in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The literature search yielded 1312 articles, 24 of which were included for the qualitative analysis. Findings in these studies demonstrated that BSS outperformed SWC in all measured outcomes, suggesting that BSS may be a superior treatment for DFUs. Of the 24 articles, 8 articles compared human amniotic membrane allografts (hAMA) to BSS. Conflicting evidence was observed when comparing BSS and hAMA treatments, highlighting the need for future research.

Advanced Biomaterials and Topical Medications for Treating Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Significance: With the increasing diabetic population worldwide, diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are a significant concern. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of skin substitutes, biomaterials, and topical agents with standard care. Recent Advances: A meta-analysis was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched using the following keywords: diabetes mellitus AND skin graft OR tissue replacement OR dressing OR drug. Two independent reviewers performed data collection and quality assessment of the eligible studies. The primary outcome was the 12- to 16-week healing rates and the secondary outcome was recurrence rates. Critical Issues: Thirty-eight randomized controlled trials, including 3,862 patients, were analyzed. The studies exhibited low heterogeneity (τ2 = 0.10) without significant asymmetry (Egger's test, p = 0.8852). After pooling direct and indirect estimates, placenta-based tissue products exhibited the best wound healing probability (p-score = 0.90), followed by skin substitutes with living cells (p-score = 0.70), acellular skin substitutes (p-score = 0.56), and advanced topical dressings (p-score = 0.34) compared with standard of care. The recurrence analysis showed significant improvement in the intervention group compared with the control group (11.21% vs. 15.15%). Future Directions: This network meta-analysis provides the relative effectiveness and rank of biomaterials and topical dressings in DFU healing. The results could help clinical decision making.

Covering skin defects with a xenogeneic collagen matrix in comparison with a skin graft - A multicenter randomized controlled trial

The objective of this study was to analyze, in a randomized controlled multicenter trial, whether a xenogeneic collagen matrix (XCM) could be used to cover skin defects. Patients with the need for skin excisions were recruited and randomized to treatment with a skin graft after a period of granulation or to treatment with an XCM. The results were evaluated by two independent observers on the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale. On this scale, scars are ranked from 1 to 10 in six different categories. Results range from 6 to 60, with lower scores representing scars closer to normal skin. The results 6 months after reconstruction were used as primary endpoint and compared in a non-inferiority approach. A total of 39 wounds in the head and neck region were analyzed. The mean results were 16.55 (standard deviation 6.8) for XCM and 16.83 (standard deviation 8.21) in the control group. The result of the XCM was not significantly inferior to the result of the skin graft (p = 0.91). Within the limitations of the study, it seems that the use of xenogeneic collagen matrices is a viable alternative to other approaches in small skin defects, and therefore should be taken into account whenever the reduction of patient morbidity to a minimum is the priority. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register under registration identification number DRKS00010930 and can be found under the following URLs: https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00010930. https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=DRKS00010930.