Interventions in the management of diabetes-related foot infections: A systematic review

The optimal approaches to managing diabetic foot infections remain a challenge for clinicians. Despite an exponential rise in publications investigating different treatment strategies, the various agents studied generally produce comparable results, and high-quality data are scarce. In this systematic review, we searched the medical literature using the PubMed and Embase databases for published studies on the treatment of diabetic foot infections from 30 June 2018 to 30 June 2022. We combined this search with our previous literature search of a systematic review performed in 2020, in which the infection committee of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot searched the literature until June 2018. We defined the context of the literature by formulating clinical questions of interest, then developing structured clinical questions (Patients-Intervention-Control-Outcomes) to address these. We only included data from controlled studies of an intervention to prevent or cure a diabetic foot infection. Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion and then assessed their relevant outcomes and methodological quality. Our literature search identified a total of 5,418 articles, of which we selected 32 for full-text review. Overall, the newly available studies we identified since 2018 do not significantly modify the body of the 2020 statements for the interventions in the management of diabetes-related foot infections. The recent data confirm that outcomes in patients treated with the different antibiotic regimens for both skin and soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis of the diabetes-related foot are broadly equivalent across studies, with a few exceptions (tigecycline not non-inferior to ertapenem [±vancomycin]). The newly available data suggest that antibiotic therapy following surgical debridement for moderate or severe infections could be reduced to 10 days and to 3 weeks for osteomyelitis following surgical debridement of bone. Similar outcomes were reported in studies comparing primarily surgical and predominantly antibiotic treatment strategies in selected patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis. There is insufficient high-quality evidence to assess the effect of various recent adjunctive therapies, such as cold plasma for infected foot ulcers and bioactive glass for osteomyelitis. Our updated systematic review confirms a trend to a better quality of the most recent trials and the need for further well-designed trials to produce higher quality evidence to underpin our recommendations.

Immersion of debrided diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) tissue in electrochemically generated pH neutral hypochlorous acid significantly reduces the microbial bioburden: whole-genome sequencing of Staphylococcus aureus, the most prevalent species recovered

BACKGROUND

Diabetic foot ulcer infections (DFUIs) are the leading cause of lower limb amputations, mediated predominantly by Staphylococcus aureus. pH neutral electrochemically-generated hypochlorous acid (anolyte) is a non-toxic, microbiocidal agent with significant potential for wound disinfection.

AIMS

To investigate both the effectiveness of anolyte for microbial bioburden reduction in debrided ulcer tissues and the population of resident S. aureus.

METHODS

Fifty-one debrided tissues from 30 people with type II diabetes were aliquoted by wet weight and immersed in 1 or 10 ml volumes of anolyte (200 parts per million) or saline for three min. Microbial loads recovered were determined in colony forming units/g (CFU/g) of tissue following aerobic, anaerobic and staphylococcal-selective culture. Bacterial species were identified and 50 S. aureus isolates from 30 tissues underwent whole-genome sequencing (WGS).

FINDINGS

The ulcers were predominantly superficial, lacking signs of infection (39/51, 76.5%). Of the 42/51 saline-treated tissues yielding ≥10⁵ CFU/g, a microbial threshold reported to impede wound-healing, only 4/42 (9.5%) were clinically-diagnosed DFUIs. Microbial loads from anolyte-treated tissues were significantly lower than saline-treated tissues using 1 ml (1065-fold, 2.0 log) and 10 ml (8216-fold, 2.1 log) immersion volumes (p<0.0005). Staphylococcus aureus was the predominant species recovered (44/51, 86.3%) and 50 isolates underwent WGS. All were meticillin-susceptible and comprised 12 sequence types (STs), predominantly ST1, ST5 and ST15. Whole-genome multilocus sequence typing identified three clusters of closely related isolates from 10 patients indicating inter-patient transmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Short immersions of debrided ulcer tissue in anolyte significantly reduced microbial bioburden: a potential novel DFUI treatment.

Comparative study of the efficacy of Ionic Silver Solution and Super Oxidized Solution in the management of chronic wounds

Background

Chronic wounds are of many etiologies and difficult to treat. Many commercial products to manage such wounds are available, which claim to have good outcomes. Aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of Ionic Silver Solution and Super Oxidized Solution in the management of chronic wounds.

Methods

Patients with chronic wounds were randomly placed in two groups-Group A (Ionic Silver Solution) and Group B (Super Oxidized Solution) with 30 patients each. The dressings were continued until the wound healed completely or the wound was ready for a definitive procedure. Wound parameters were recorded as per Bates Jensen Wound Assessment Tool (BJWAT) Score.

Results

FIfty patients completed the study. The scores were compared at the initiation and endpoint of treatment. The pretreatment total for BJWAT was 916 and 924 in group A and group B respectively, which was not statistically significant. Post-treatment improvement was noticed in both the groups and the score decreased to 510 and 675 in group A and group B respectively (p = 0.001). Ionic Silver Solution and Super Oxidized Solution both were found to be effective in improving the overall wound condition. However, Ionic Silver Solution was found to be more effective than Super Oxidized Solution in the healing of chronic wounds. Complete healing was noticed in a small number (6%) of patients. These agents can therefore best prepare the wounds for early surgical intervention.

Conclusion

Both the agents were found to be safe and useful in the management of chronic wounds. However, Ionic Silver Solution was found to be more effective than the super oxidized solution in this study.

Antibacterial efficacy of a pH-neutral electrolyzed super-oxidized solution for nonsurgical periodontal treatment

Objective

Mouthwash is effective in maintaining oral hygiene in patients; however, there is concern that it may adversely affect human oral mucosa. We evaluated a pH-neutral electrolyzed super-oxidized solution (ESS, tradename OxOral®) combined with dental scaling in periodontitis patients. This longitudinal study was conducted with 34 patients divided into three groups. The control group treated with scaling plus saline, the second with scaling plus ESS mouthwash, and another with scaling plus ESS mouthwash and gel. The plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), and probing depth (PD) were determined before and after periodontal treatment.

Results

The final PI and GI decreased compared with the initial measurements in the three treatment groups (p < 0.05). Scaling plus ESS mouthwash and gel significantly reduced the final PI, GI, and DP compared to the control group (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Our study shows the antiseptic properties of ESS with mouthwash and gel. Further studies are needed to verify the results.

Local wound management: A review of modern techniques and products

Management of wounds is a commonly performed and essential aspect of small animal veterinary medicine. Appropriate wound management is a difficult art to master, due to the inherent complexity of the clinical scenario, as well as the ever-evolving nature of the field with the constant addition of new products and techniques. This article reviews key concepts that may help the practitioner better understand the natural process of wound healing, factors that delay healing and strategies to help improve the local wound environment to make it more conducive to healing during open wound management. The concept of wound bed preparation is defined before common local wound management strategies, such as wound lavage and debridement, are discussed in more detail. Key aspects of the management of biofilms and appropriate use of antimicrobial agents are also reviewed. Finally, the concept of moist wound healing and its impact in modern wound management is explained before a broad variety of types of wound dressings are reviewed, with a particular focus on active dressings.

Australian guideline on wound healing interventions to enhance healing of foot ulcers: part of the 2021 Australian evidence-based guidelines for diabetes-related foot disease

Background

Diabetes-related foot ulceration (DFU) has a substantial burden on both individuals and healthcare systems both globally and in Australia. There is a pressing need for updated guidelines on wound healing interventions to improve outcomes for people living with DFU. A national expert panel was convened to develop new Australian evidence-based guidelines on wound healing interventions for people with DFU by adapting suitable international guidelines to the Australian context.

Methods

The panel followed National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) procedures to adapt suitable international guidelines by the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) to the Australian context. The panel systematically screened, assessed and judged all IWGDF wound healing recommendations using ADAPTE and GRADE frameworks for adapting guidelines to decide which recommendations should be adopted, adapted or excluded in the Australian context. Each recommendation had their wording, quality of evidence, and strength of recommendation re-evaluated, plus rationale, justifications and implementation considerations provided for the Australian context. This guideline underwent public consultation, further revision and approval by ten national peak bodies.

Results

Thirteen IWGDF wound healing recommendations were evaluated in this process. After screening, nine recommendations were adopted and four were adapted after full assessment. Two recommendations had their strength of recommendations downgraded, one intervention was not currently approved for use in Australia, one intervention specified the need to obtain informed consent to be acceptable in Australia, and another was reworded to clarify best standard of care. Overall, five wound healing interventions have been recommended as having the evidence-based potential to improve wound healing in specific types of DFU when used in conjunction with other best standards of DFU care, including sucrose-octasulfate impregnated dressing, systemic hyperbaric oxygen therapy, negative pressure wound therapy, placental-derived products, and the autologous combined leucocyte, platelet and fibrin dressing. The six new guidelines and the full protocol can be found at: https://diabetesfeetaustralia.org/new-guidelines/

Conclusions

The IWGDF guideline for wound healing interventions has been adapted to suit the Australian context, and in particular for geographically remote and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. This new national wound healing guideline, endorsed by ten national peak bodies, also highlights important considerations for implementation, monitoring, and future research priorities in Australia.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13047-022-00544-5.

Recent technological advances in the management of chronic wounds: A literature review

Background

Wound treatment comprises a substantial portion of the healthcare budgets in developed countries. Studies suggest that about 50% of patients admitted to hospitals have wounds, while 1%−2% of the general population in the developed world suffers from chronic wounds. Chronic wounds fail to repair themselves within the expected period of 30 days. Technologies have been developed to address challenges encountered during wound care with the aim of alleviating pain, promoting healing, or controlling wound infections.

Objective

The objective of this study was to explore the technological improvements that have been made in this field over time.

Methods

To gain insight into the future of wound management, a systematic review of literature on the subject was conducted in scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Medline, and Clinical Trials).

Results and Discussion

Results indicate that wound dressings have evolved from the traditional cotton gauze to composite materials embedded with appropriate ingredients such as metal‐based nanoparticles. Studies on biodegradable dressing materials are also underway to explore their applicability in dressing large and irregular wounds. On the other hand, conventional drugs and traditional formulations for the management of pain, inflammation, infections, and accelerating healing have been developed. However, more research needs to be carried out to address the issue of microbial resistance to drugs. Drugs for managing other ailments also need to be designed in such a way that they can augment wound healing. In addition, it has been demonstrated that a coordinated integration of conventional and traditional medicine can produce laudable results in chronic wound management.

Conclusion

Accordingly, collaborative efforts and ingenuity of all players in the field can accelerate technological advances in the wound care market to the benefit of the patients.

Wounds affect about 50% of patients admitted to hospitals.

Technologies have been developed including biodegradable dressing materials to address underlying challenges.

Technological advancement, rising incidences of chronic wounds, growing government support, and a rising elderly population will drive wound market growth.

A careful combination of recent research outputs can greatly change wound care technologies.

This review highlights the recent research advances and opportunities in the wound care field.

The future lies in biodegradable dressing materials, probably embedded with selected nanoparticles and which shall be combined in predetermined ratios.

Comparison of Skin Antiseptic Agents and the Role of 0.01% Hypochlorous Acid

BACKGROUND

Hypochlorous acid (HA) has both anti-microbial and wound-healing properties with a growing role for utilization in pre-procedural care on the face.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to compare the antiseptic property of 0.01% HA solution, 5% povidone iodine (PI), 4% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG), and 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) antiseptic on facial skin.

METHODS

This was a prospective single-center clinical trial.

RESULTS

A total of 21 participants were recruited. Bacterial growth was seen in CHG (10%), IPA (71%), PI (81%), and HA (95%) of specimens (P < 0.001). CHG had less growth compared with HA (P = <0.001), IPA (P = <0.001), and PI (P = <0.001). No difference in bacterial growth was noted between HA and IPA (P = 0.063) or HA and PI (P = 0.25). Significant differences in mono-microbial and poly-microbial growth were seen between HA and IPA (P = 0.046) and HA and CHG (P = <0.001). Staphylococcus epidermidis grew less frequently in CHG (10%), followed by IPA (29%), PI (71%), and HA (71%). Staphylococcus capitis grew less frequently in CHG (0%), followed by PI (14%), HA (24%), and IPA (29%).

CONCLUSIONS

CHG reduced the bacterial growth compared with HA, PI, and IPA. However, HA, PI, and IPA had insignificant differences in bactericidal effects. Our study provides a supporting role of HA to be considered as an antiseptic.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2

Wound cleansing: benefits of hypochlorous acid

Cleansing provides an opportunity to remove pathogens from the wound bed, thereby preventing an increase in the bioburden and delayed healing. This article describes the reported efficacy of hypochlorous acid-containing wound cleansers.

Antimicrobial laser-activated sealants for combating surgical site infections

Surgical-site infections (SSIs) occur in 2-5% of patients undergoing surgery in the US alone, impacting 300 000-500 000 lives each year, and presenting up to 11 times greater risk of death compared to patients without SSIs. The most common cause of SSI is Staphylococcus aureus, and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) is the most common pathogen in community hospitals. Current clinical devices used for approximating incisions and traumatic lacerations include sutures, adhesives, tapes, or staples with or without antimicrobial incorporation. However, current closure technologies may not provide adequate protection against infection, are susceptible to wound dehiscence, and can result in delayed biomechanical recoveries. Laser-activated tissue repair is a sutureless technique in which chromophore-loaded sealants convert laser light energy to heat in order to induce rapid tissue sealing. Here, we describe the generation and evaluation of laser-activated sealant (LASE) biomaterials, in which, indocyanine green (ICG), an FDA-approved dye, was embedded in a silk fibroin matrix and cast into films as wound sealants. Silk-ICG films were subjected to different near-infrared (NIR) laser powers to identify temperatures optimal for laser sealing of soft tissues. A mathematical model was developed in order to determine the photothermal conversion efficiency of LASEs following laser irradiation. NIR laser activation of silk-ICG LASEs increased the recovery of skin biomechanical strength compared to sutured skin in full-thickness incisional wounds in immunocompetent mice, and live animal imaging indicated persistence of silk-ICG LASEs over several days. LASEs loaded with the antibiotic vancomycin demonstrated higher efficacies for combating MRSA infections in a mouse model of surgical site infection compared to antibacterial sutures. Our results demonstrate that LASEs can be loaded with antimicrobial drugs and may serve as new multifunctional biomaterials for rapid tissue sealing, repair and surgical site protection following surgery.

Prescribed exercise regimen versus usual care and hypochlorous acid wound solution versus placebo for treating venous leg ulcers: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (Factorial4VLU)

INTRODUCTION

Compression is the mainstay of treatment for venous leg ulcers (VLUs) and there are few effective adjuvant treatments. There is only observational evidence supporting the use of hypochlorous acid (HOCl) as a topical wound solution on VLU and some limited randomised evidence for the effect of a prescribed regimen of exercise.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Factorial4VLU trial is a pragmatic, blinded, factorial randomised controlled trial, with 380 participants receiving either a prescribed exercise regimen compared with usual care and either active HOCl wound solution or placebo wound solution at each dressing change for up to 24 weeks. All participants will receive compression therapy. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants with healed VLU at 12 weeks after randomisation as adjudicated by blinded review of ulcer photographs. Secondary outcomes are proportion healed at 24 weeks, time to healing, estimated change in ulcer area, change in 2-Minute Walk Test, change in health-related quality of life, incidence of infection and incidence of all-cause adverse events. If either of the interventions shows a statistically significant positive difference on healing outcomes, cost-effectiveness will be modelled using a health service perspective.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Factorial4VLU trial received ethical approval from the Northern B Health and Disability Ethics Committee. We plan to publish the results within 1 year of trial completion and will include the results on the trial registration page.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (http://www.anzctr.org.au) (ACTRN12620000116921); Universal Trial Number (WHO) (U1111-1236-2997).

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.

Interventions in the management of infection in the foot in diabetes: a systematic review

The optimal approaches to managing diabetic foot infections remain a challenge for clinicians. Despite an exponential rise in publications investigating different treatment strategies, the various agents studied generally produce comparable results, and high-quality data are scarce. In this systematic review, we searched the medical literature using the PubMed and Embase databases for published studies on the treatment of diabetic foot infections as of June 2018. This systematic review is an update of previous reviews, the first of which was undertaken in 2010 and the most recent in 2014, by the infection committee of the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot. We defined the context of literature by formulating clinical questions of interest, then developing structured clinical questions (PICOs) to address these. We only included data from controlled studies of an intervention to prevent or cure a diabetic foot infection. Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion and then assessed their relevant outcomes and the methodological quality. Our literature search identified a total of 15 327 articles, of which we selected 48 for full-text review; we added five more studies discovered by means other than the systematic literature search. Among these selected articles were 11 high-quality studies published in the last 4 years and two Cochrane systematic reviews. Overall, the outcomes in patients treated with the different antibiotic regimens for both skin and soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis of the diabetic foot were broadly equivalent across studies, except that treatment with tigecycline was inferior to ertapenem (±vancomycin). Similar outcomes were also reported in studies comparing primarily surgical and predominantly antibiotic treatment strategies in selected patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis. There is insufficient high-quality evidence to assess the effect of various adjunctive therapies, such as negative pressure wound therapy, topical ointments or hyperbaric oxygen, on infection related outcomes of the diabetic foot. In general, the quality of more recent trial designs are better in past years, but there is still a great need for further well-designed trials to produce higher quality evidence to underpin our recommendations.

Antimicrobial efficacy of a very stable hypochlorous acid formula compared with other antiseptics used in treating wounds: in-vitro study on micro-organisms with or without biofilm

BACKGROUND

Many antiseptics have been used to treat wounds.

AIM

To compare the microbicidal efficacy of ClHO (Clortech®) with other antiseptics used on wounds, healthy skin and mucous membranes.

METHODS

The microbicidal efficacy of 13 antiseptic products on eight micro-organisms (three Gram-positive; three Gram-negative; two yeasts) inoculated on organic germ-carriers was studied. In addition, the loss of efficacy against Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa with biofilm was assessed with the six best-performing products.

FINDINGS

Chlorhexidine (1%) had the highest microbicidal effect at 1 min. At 5 min, 500 and 1500 mg/L ClHO showed similar, or better, activity than the other antiseptics studied. The ClHO concentration of 300 mg/L achieved this same efficacy at 10 min. The product that lost the most efficacy due to biofilm was 1% chlorhexidine, while 1% PVP-I and ClHO at either 300 or 500 mg/L were moderately affected by biofilm. The most effective in the presence of biofilm was ClHO at 1500 mg/L.

CONCLUSIONS

ClHO at medium-low concentrations (300 or 500 mg/L) is a good antiseptic that can be used on wounds and mucous membranes for 5-10 min. Lower concentrations of ClHO, as well as of the other antiseptics studied, were less effective or more altered by the biofilm. ClHO at a concentration of 1500 mg/L is very effective in the presence or absence of biofilm that can be used on healthy skin for 5 min.

Antimicrobial and Anti-Biofilm Effect of an Electrolyzed Superoxidized Solution at Neutral-pH against Helicobacter pylori

The presence of Helicobacter pylori in the oral cavity has been associated to the failure of antimicrobial therapy in patients with gastrointestinal infection and the development of oral diseases. However, it has been reported that the maintenance of good oral hygiene can improve the therapeutic success rates, where the use of mouthwashes with anti-Helicobacter activity would help to achieve it. The aim was to evaluate the antimicrobial activity of OxOral® mouthwash against H. pylori and its effect on biofilm formation. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of OxOral® (pH = 6.4–7.5, ORP = 650–900 mV) against H. pylori was calculated testing serial dilutions 0.117–15 ppm against 1 × 10⁸ CFU/mL of H. pylori (ATCC® 700824™) by broth microdilution method using 96‐well plates. The H. pylori biofilm formation was determined by the optical density measurement at 600 nm from coverslips stained with 0.1% crystal violet. The gene expression of ureA, luxS, flaA, omp18, and lpxD were analyzed by RT‐qPCR. OxOral® cytotoxicity was evaluated in a human gingival fibroblast cell line by MTT assay. MIC was of 3.75 ppm, with 99.7 ± 7.7% bacterial growth inhibition. In the negative control, the biofilm formation was observed, whereas when bacteria were treated with OxOral® at 0.234, 0.469, and 0.938 ppm, an inhibition of 35.5 ± 0.9%, 89.1 ± 1.2%, and 99.9 ± 5.5% were obtained, respectively. The gene expression analysis showed that flaA, omp18, and lpxD genes were down‐regulated with OxOral® compared with control (p < 0.05). Low cytotoxicity of 16.5 ± 7.6% was observed at the highest dose (15 ppm); no significant differences were observed from 15 to 0.469 ppm compared to the control of untreated cells (p > 0.05). Our results reveal an important anti-Helicobacter activity of OxOral® and open the possibility of its therapeutic use new studies, which would increase the success rate of conventional therapies against H. pylori.

Postoperative effects on lower third molars of using mouthwashes with super-oxidized solution versus 0.2% chlorhexidine gel: A randomized double-blind trial

BACKGROUND

The main objective of the present study is to evaluate the effects and possible benefits with regard to the postoperative period of lower third molar extractions, comparing the intraalveolar application of a bioadhesive gel of 0.2% chlorhexidine (CHX) to the use of a mouthwash with a super-oxidized solution, (SOS) Dermacyn® Wound Care (Oculus Innovative Sciences lnc., California, USA).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A randomized double-blind study was carried out in 20 patients with a split-mouth design, with a total of 40 extractions of symmetrically impacted bilateral lower third molars. Patients were divided into two groups, a control group (C = 20) and an experimental group (D = 20). Any infectious complications, wound healing, plaque accumulation in the stitches, and presence of trismus and inflammation were evaluated using the distance between different facial points, at three, eight, and fifteen days after extraction. Pain, swelling, and amount of analgesics taken were evaluated using the VAS scale throughout the 15 days following extraction. Tolerance to treatment was evaluated using a verbal scale. Results were statistically compared using the Student's t- and chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups with regard to infectious complications, swelling, or wound healing. Use of analgesics and self-reported pain levels were slightly lower in the experimental group than in the control group during days 6 and 7 of the study (p < 0.05). The global treatment tolerance was satisfactory and similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both CHX and SOS are effective at improving the postoperative period after extraction of lower third molars.

The Use of a Novel Super-Oxidized Solution on Top of Standard Treatment in the Home Care Management of Postsurgical Lesions of the Diabetic Foot Reduces Reinfections and Shortens Healing Time

There are still many unmet needs in the treatment of chronic wounds, especially regarding microenvironment modulation. Nexodyn is a novel super-oxidized solution capable of contrast bacterial proliferation. We aimed to evaluate if this solution, on top of standard of care, was safe and effective in improving diabetic foot outcome. We selected 50 patients admitted in our department to be submitted to surgery for acute diabetic foot infection. All patients were left open to heal for secondary intent. We divided patients into 2 groups: Group A (n = 25, male/female = 17/8, age = 67.3 ± 12.1 years, hemoglobin A1C = 7.9 ± 1.1%), patients treated with standard of care and, on top of this, Nexodyn solution, and Group B, treated only with standard of care. After discharge, patients continued Nexodyn application. We followed up patients until complete healing or up to 6 months. No differences between groups in healing rate, while time required for complete healing was significantly shorter in Group A (64.9 ± 12.1 days vs 147.4 ± 23.1 days, P < .01). During follow-up, the group treated with Nexodyn showed a reduced rate of reinfections (12 patients in Group B vs 3 patients in Group A, P < .05) and of further debridement procedures (1 patient in Group A vs 10 patients in Group B, P < .05). Nexodyn provided effective protection against reinfections in diabetic foot patients, thus reducing the necessity for debridement procedures and their healing time and presents a safety profile similar to saline solution.

Consensus on Wound Antisepsis: Update 2018

Wound antisepsis has undergone a renaissance due to the introduction of highly effective wound-compatible antimicrobial agents and the spread of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs). However, a strict indication must be set for the application of these agents. An infected or critically colonized wound must be treated antiseptically. In addition, systemic antibiotic therapy is required in case the infection spreads. If applied preventively, the Wounds-at-Risk Score allows an assessment of the risk for infection and thus appropriateness of the indication. The content of this updated consensus recommendation still largely consists of discussing properties of octenidine dihydrochloride (OCT), polihexanide, and iodophores. The evaluations of hypochlorite, taurolidine, and silver ions have been updated. For critically colonized and infected chronic wounds as well as for burns, polihexanide is classified as the active agent of choice. The combination 0.1% OCT/phenoxyethanol (PE) solution is suitable for acute, contaminated, and traumatic wounds, including MRSA-colonized wounds due to its deep action. For chronic wounds, preparations with 0.05% OCT are preferable. For bite, stab/puncture, and gunshot wounds, polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP)-iodine is the first choice, while polihexanide and hypochlorite are superior to PVP-iodine for the treatment of contaminated acute and chronic wounds. For the decolonization of wounds colonized or infected with MDROs, the combination of OCT/PE is preferred. For peritoneal rinsing or rinsing of other cavities with a lack of drainage potential as well as the risk of central nervous system exposure, hypochlorite is the superior active agent. Silver-sulfadiazine is classified as dispensable, while dyes, organic mercury compounds, and hydrogen peroxide alone are classified as obsolete. As promising prospects, acetic acid, the combination of negative pressure wound therapy with the instillation of antiseptics (NPWTi), and cold atmospheric plasma are also subjects of this assessment.

Topical antimicrobial agents for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes

BACKGROUND

People with diabetes are at high risk for developing foot ulcers, which often become infected. These wounds, especially when infected, cause substantial morbidity. Wound treatments should aim to alleviate symptoms, promote healing, and avoid adverse outcomes, especially lower extremity amputation. Topical antimicrobial therapy has been used on diabetic foot ulcers, either as a treatment for clinically infected wounds, or to prevent infection in clinically uninfected wounds.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of treatment with topical antimicrobial agents on: the resolution of signs and symptoms of infection; the healing of infected diabetic foot ulcers; and preventing infection and improving healing in clinically uninfected diabetic foot ulcers.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Ovid Embase, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus in August 2016. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and checked reference lists to identify additional studies. We used no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication, or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials conducted in any setting (inpatient or outpatient) that evaluated topical treatment with any type of solid or liquid (e.g., cream, gel, ointment) antimicrobial agent, including antiseptics, antibiotics, and antimicrobial dressings, in people with diabetes mellitus who were diagnosed with an ulcer or open wound of the foot, whether clinically infected or uninfected.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and data extraction. Initial disagreements were resolved by discussion, or by including a third review author when necessary.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 22 trials that met our inclusion criteria with a total of over 2310 participants (one study did not report number of participants). The included studies mostly had small numbers of participants (from 4 to 317) and relatively short follow-up periods (4 to 24 weeks). At baseline, six trials included only people with ulcers that were clinically infected; one trial included people with both infected and uninfected ulcers; two trials included people with non-infected ulcers; and the remaining 13 studies did not report infection status.Included studies employed various topical antimicrobial treatments, including antimicrobial dressings (e.g. silver, iodides), super-oxidised aqueous solutions, zinc hyaluronate, silver sulphadiazine, tretinoin, pexiganan cream, and chloramine. We performed the following five comparisons based on the included studies: Antimicrobial dressings compared with non-antimicrobial dressings: Pooled data from five trials with a total of 945 participants suggest (based on the average treatment effect from a random-effects model) that more wounds may heal when treated with an antimicrobial dressing than with a non-antimicrobial dressing: risk ratio (RR) 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12 to 1.45. These results correspond to an additional 119 healing events in the antimicrobial-dressing arm per 1000 participants (95% CI 51 to 191 more). We consider this low-certainty evidence (downgraded twice due to risk of bias). The evidence on adverse events or other outcomes was uncertain (very low-certainty evidence, frequently downgraded due to risk of bias and imprecision). Antimicrobial topical treatments (non dressings) compared with non-antimicrobial topical treatments (non dressings): There were four trials with a total of 132 participants in this comparison that contributed variously to the estimates of outcome data. Evidence was generally of low or very low certainty, and the 95% CIs spanned benefit and harm: proportion of wounds healed RR 2.82 (95% CI 0.56 to 14.23; 112 participants; 3 trials; very low-certainty evidence); achieving resolution of infection RR 1.16 (95% CI 0.54 to 2.51; 40 participants; 1 trial; low-certainty evidence); undergoing surgical resection RR 1.67 (95% CI 0.47 to 5.90; 40 participants; 1 trial; low-certainty evidence); and sustaining an adverse event (no events in either arm; 81 participants; 2 trials; very low-certainty evidence). Comparison of different topical antimicrobial treatments: We included eight studies with a total of 250 participants, but all of the comparisons were different and no data could be appropriately pooled. Reported outcome data were limited and we are uncertain about the relative effects of antimicrobial topical agents for each of our review outcomes for this comparison, that is wound healing, resolution of infection, surgical resection, and adverse events (all very low-certainty evidence). Topical antimicrobials compared with systemic antibiotics : We included four studies with a total of 937 participants. These studies reported no wound-healing data, and the evidence was uncertain for the relative effects on resolution of infection in infected ulcers and surgical resection (very low certainty). On average, there is probably little difference in the risk of adverse events between the compared topical antimicrobial and systemic antibiotics treatments: RR 0.91 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.06; moderate-certainty evidence - downgraded once for inconsistency). Topical antimicrobial agents compared with growth factor: We included one study with 40 participants. The only review-relevant outcome reported was number of ulcers healed, and these data were uncertain (very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The randomised controlled trial data on the effectiveness and safety of topical antimicrobial treatments for diabetic foot ulcers is limited by the availability of relatively few, mostly small, and often poorly designed trials. Based on our systematic review and analysis of the literature, we suggest that: 1) use of an antimicrobial dressing instead of a non-antimicrobial dressing may increase the number of diabetic foot ulcers healed over a medium-term follow-up period (low-certainty evidence); and 2) there is probably little difference in the risk of adverse events related to treatment between systemic antibiotics and topical antimicrobial treatments based on the available studies (moderate-certainty evidence). For each of the other outcomes we examined there were either no reported data or the available data left us uncertain as to whether or not there were any differences between the compared treatments. Given the high, and increasing, frequency of diabetic foot wounds, we encourage investigators to undertake properly designed randomised controlled trials in this area to evaluate the effects of topical antimicrobial treatments for both the prevention and the treatment of infection in these wounds and ultimately the effects on wound healing.

Hypochlorous acid gel technology-Its impact on postprocedure treatment and scar prevention

BACKGROUND

A pre-and postprocedure regime aimed at prevention of infection, reduction of inflammation and risk of scarring, is to enable optimal outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The role of a hypochlorous acid containing spray and translucent scar gel formulation that combines modified silicon oil with hypochlorous acid, was explored for pre- and postprocedure treatment and scar management.

METHODS

For this purpose a literature review was conducted to explore the value of the technology used in pre-and postprocedural regimes. A panel of dermatologists and plastic surgeons who practice in the United States discussed the summarized search results, taking into account their current clinical practice. A nominal group process for consensus was used, followed by online reviews of the manuscript.

RESULTS

Based on panel discussions, consensus was reached regarding clinical recommendations given for postprocedure treatment and scar management. The hypochlorous acid products are produced with electrolysis and are classified among biocidal substances. The technology has demonstrated efficacy and safety for pre-and postprocedure use. The safety of hypochlorous solution use demonstrated to be comparable to that of standard local antiseptics. Small studies demonstrated better results with the scar gel compared to silicone gel regarding the appearance of hypertrophic and keloid scars, relief of associated pruritus and pain.

CONCLUSIONS

A postprocedure regime using this technology, aimed at preventing infection, reducing inflammation, and promoting healing is proposed to have benefits over current regimes as it appears to be effective, safe, and well tolerated.

Antibiotics and antiseptics for surgical wounds healing by secondary intention

BACKGROUND

Following surgery, incisions are usually closed by fixing the edges together with sutures (stitches), staples, adhesives (glue) or clips. This process helps the cut edges heal together and is called 'healing by primary intention'. However, a minority of surgical wounds are not closed in this way. Where the risk of infection is high or there has been significant loss of tissue, wounds may be left open to heal by the growth of new tissue rather than by primary closure; this is known as 'healing by secondary intention'. There is a risk of infection in open wounds, which may impact on wound healing, and antiseptic or antibiotic treatments may be used with the aim of preventing or treating such infections. This review is one of a suite of Cochrane reviews investigating the evidence on antiseptics and antibiotics in different types of wounds. It aims to present current evidence related to the use of antiseptics and antibiotics for surgical wounds healing by secondary intention (SWHSI).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of systemic and topical antibiotics, and topical antiseptics for the treatment of surgical wounds healing by secondary intention.

SEARCH METHODS

In November 2015 we searched: The Cochrane Wounds 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. We also searched three clinical trials registries and the references of included studies and relevant systematic reviews. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials which enrolled adults with a surgical wound healing by secondary intention and assessed treatment with an antiseptic or antibiotic treatment. Studies enrolling people with skin graft donor sites were not included, neither were studies of wounds with a non-surgical origin which had subsequently undergone sharp or surgical debridement or other surgical treatments or wounds within the oral or aural cavities.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven studies with a total of 886 participants were included in the review. These evaluated a range of comparisons in a range of surgical wounds healing by secondary intention. In general studies were small and some did not present data or analyses that could be easily interpreted or related to clinical outcomes. These factors reduced the quality of the evidence.Two comparisons compared different iodine preparations with no antiseptic treatment and found no clear evidence of effects for these treatments. The outcome data available were limited and what evidence there was low quality.One study compared a zinc oxide mesh dressing with a plain mesh dressing. There was no clear evidence of a difference in time to wound healing between groups. There was some evidence of a difference in measures used to assess wound infection (wound with foul smell and number of participants prescribed antibiotics) which favoured the zinc oxide group. This was low quality evidence.One study reported that sucralfate cream increased the likelihood of healing open wounds following haemorrhoidectomy compared to a petrolatum cream (RR: 1.50, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.99) over a three week period. This evidence was graded as being of moderate quality. The study also reported lower wound pain scores in the sucralfate group.There was a reduction in time to healing of open wounds following haemorrhoidectomy when treated with Triclosan post-operatively compared with a standard sodium hypochlorite solution (mean difference -1.70 days, 95% CI -3.41 to 0.01). This was classed as low quality evidence.There was moderate quality evidence that more open wounds resulting from excision of pyomyositis abscesses healed when treated with a honey-soaked gauze compared with a EUSOL-soaked gauze over three weeks' follow-up (RR: 1.58, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.42). There was also some evidence of a reduction in the mean length of hospital stay in the honey group. Evidence was taken from one small study that only had 43 participants.There was moderate quality evidence that more Dermacym®-treated post-operative foot wounds in people with diabetes healed compared to those treated with iodine (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.93). Again estimates came from one small study with 40 participants.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no robust evidence on the relative effectiveness of any antiseptic/antibiotic/anti-bacterial preparation evaluated to date for use on SWHSI. Where some evidence for possible treatment effects was reported, it stemmed from single studies with small participant numbers and was classed as moderate or low quality evidence. This means it is likely or very likely that further research will have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect, and may change this estimate.

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.

Interventions in the management of infection in the foot in diabetes: a systematic review

The expert panel on diabetic foot infection (DFI) of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot conducted a systematic review seeking all published reports relating to any type of treatment for infection of the foot in persons with diabetes published as of 30 June 2014. This review, conducted with both PubMed and EMBASE, was used to update an earlier one undertaken on 30 June 2010 using the same search string. Eligible publications included those that had outcome measures reported for both a treated and a control population that were managed either at the same time, or as part of a before-and-after case design. We did not include studies that contained only information related to definition or diagnosis, but not treatment, of DFI. The current search identified just seven new articles meeting our criteria that were published since the 33 identified with the previous search, making a total of 40 articles from the world literature. The identified articles included 37 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and three cohort studies with concurrent controls, and included studies on the use of surgical procedures, topical antiseptics, negative pressure wound therapy and hyperbaric oxygen. Among the studies were 15 RCTs that compared outcomes of treatment with new antibiotic preparations compared with a conventional therapy in the management of skin and soft tissue infection. In addition, 10 RCTs and 1 cohort study compared different treatments for osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot. Results of comparisons of different antibiotic regimens generally demonstrated that newly introduced antibiotic regimens appeared to be as effective as conventional therapy (and also more cost-effective in one study), but one study failed to demonstrate non-inferiority of a new antibiotic compared with that of a standard agent. Overall, the available literature was both limited in both the number of studies and the quality of their design. Thus, our systematic review revealed little evidence upon which to make recommendations for treatment of DFIs. There is a great need for further well-designed trials that will provide robust data upon which to make decisions about the most appropriate treatment of both skin and soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis in diabetic patients.

Challenges in the Treatment of Chronic Wounds

Significance: Chronic wounds include, but are not limited, to diabetic foot ulcers, venous leg ulcers, and pressure ulcers. They are a challenge to wound care professionals and consume a great deal of healthcare resources around the globe. This review discusses the pathophysiology of complex chronic wounds and the means and modalities currently available to achieve healing in such patients. Recent Advances: Although often difficult to treat, an understanding of the underlying pathophysiology and specific attention toward managing these perturbations can often lead to successful healing. Critical Issues: Overcoming the factors that contribute to delayed healing are key components of a comprehensive approach to wound care and present the primary challenges to the treatment of chronic wounds. When wounds fail to achieve sufficient healing after 4 weeks of standard care, reassessment of underlying pathology and consideration of the need for advanced therapeutic agents should be undertaken. However, selection of an appropriate therapy is often not evidence based. Future Directions: Basic tenets of care need to be routinely followed, and a systematic evaluation of patients and their wounds will also facilitate appropriate care. Underlying pathologies, which result in the failure of these wounds to heal, differ among various types of chronic wounds. A better understanding of the differences between various types of chronic wounds at the molecular and cellular levels should improve our treatment approaches, leading to better healing rates, and facilitate the development of new more effective therapies. More evidence for the efficacy of current and future advanced wound therapies is required for their appropriate use.

What's new in the literature: an update of new research since the original WHS diabetic foot ulcer guidelines in 2006

The objective of the paper was to update the diabetic foot ulcer guidelines that were previously published in 2006. We performed a key word search using MEDLINE and Cochrane reviews for publication between January 2006 and January 2012. Articles that fit the inclusion criteria were reviewed and the previous guidelines were updated.

Super-oxidized solution (Dermacyn Wound Care) as adjuvant treatment in the postoperative management of complicated diabetic foot osteomyelitis: preliminary experience in a specialized department

Surgery is usually used to treat diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO), whether primarily or in cases in which antibiotics are not able to control infection. In many cases, the bone is only partially removed, which means that residual infection remains in the bone margins, and the wound is left open to heal by secondary intent. The use of culture-guided postoperative antibiotic treatment and adequate management of the wound must be addressed. No trials exist dealing with local treatment in the postoperative management of these cases of complicated DFO. We decided to test a super-oxidized solution, Dermacyn Wound Care (DWC; Oculus Innovative Sciences Netherlands BV, Sittard, Netherlands) to obtain preliminary experience in patients in whom infected bone remained in the surgical wounds. Our hypothesis was that DWC could be useful to control infection in the residual infected bone and surrounding soft tissues and would thus facilitate healing. Fourteen consecutive patients who underwent conservative surgery for DFO, in whom clean bone margins could not be assured, were treated in the postoperative period with DWC. Eleven cases were located in the forefoot, 6 on the first ray and the rest in lesser toes, 1 in the Lisfranc joint, and 2 on the calcaneus. No side effects appeared during treatment. Neither allergies nor skin dermatitis were found. Limb salvage was successfully achieved in 100% of the cases. Healing was achieved in a median period of 6.8 weeks.

Present and new techniques and devices in the treatment of DFU: a critical review of evidence

Management of foot ulcer in individuals with diabetes remains a major therapeutic challenge throughout the world. We performed a critical review of evidence of present and new techniques and devices in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer. The golden standard for optimal evidence in the Cochrane system is level I - randomized controlled trials, and meta-analyses of several randomized controlled trials. Available evidence on different types of wound debridement; use of antimicrobials; use of dressings in wounds; topical negative pressure, hyperbaric oxygen treatment; electrical, electromagnetic, laser, shockwave, and ultrasound therapies; growth and cell biology factors; cell products and tissue engineering; bioengineered skin and skin grafts; and adjuvant therapies were evaluated. The results of this review show that there is limited evidence on the highest level to justify a change in routine clinical practice. There is a paucity of high-quality evidence, because the studies are often based on inadequate sample size, short follow-up, nonrandom allocation to treatment arms, nonblinded assessment of outcomes, poor description of control, and concurrent intervention. The heterogeneity of the population (of both people and ulcers), with multiple factors contributing to both ulcer onset and failure to heal, makes the trial design difficult in this field. Another fundamental reason for the lack of evidence is the general use of the outcome measure 'complete healing'. In conclusion, when the results of this updated review are taken together with those of the earlier reports, they provide limited evidence to justify a change in routine clinical practice. For this reason, there is an urgent need to increase the quality of clinical studies. A re-evaluation of which type of research is acceptable for producing evidence in the wound area may be important in the future.

A systematic review of the effectiveness of interventions in the management of infection in the diabetic foot

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot expert panel on infection conducted a systematic review of the published evidence relating to treatment of foot infection in diabetes. Our search of the literature published prior to August 2010 identified 7517 articles, 29 of which fulfilled predefined criteria for detailed data extraction. Four additional eligible papers were identified from other sources. Of the total of 33 studies, 29 were randomized controlled trials, and four were cohort studies. Among 12 studies comparing different antibiotic regimens in the management of skin and soft-tissue infection, none reported a better response with any particular regimen. Of seven studies that compared antibiotic regimens in patients with infection involving both soft tissue and bone, one reported a better clinical outcome in those treated with cefoxitin compared with ampicillin/sulbactam, but the others reported no differences between treatment regimens. In two health economic analyses, there was a small saving using one regimen versus another. No published data support the superiority of any particular route of delivery of systemic antibiotics or clarify the optimal duration of antibiotic therapy in either soft-tissue infection or osteomyelitis. In one non-randomized cohort study, the outcome of treatment of osteomyelitis was better when the antibiotic choice was based on culture of bone specimens as opposed to wound swabs, but this study was not randomized, and the results may have been affected by confounding factors. Results from two studies suggested that early surgical intervention was associated with a significant reduction in major amputation, but the methodological quality of both was low. In two studies, the use of superoxidized water was associated with a better outcome than soap or povidone iodine, but both had a high risk of bias. Studies using granulocyte-colony stimulating factor reported mixed results. There was no improvement in infection outcomes associated with hyperbaric oxygen therapy. No benefit has been reported with any other intervention, and, overall, there are currently no trial data to justify the adoption of any particular therapeutic approach in diabetic patients with infection of either soft tissue or bone of the foot.

A systematic review 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 continuing uncertainty concerning optimal approaches to management. It was for these reasons that in 2006 the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) working group on wound healing undertook a systematic review 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 December 2006 and June 2010. 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 and hydrotherapy; wound bed preparation using antiseptics, applications and dressing products; resection of the chronic wound; hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT); 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; other systemic therapies which did not fit in the above categories. Heterogeneity of studies prevented pooled analysis of results. Of the 1322 papers identified, 43 were selected for grading following full text review. The present report is an update of the earlier IWGDF systematic review, but the conclusion is similar: that with the exception of HBOT and, possibly, negative pressure wound therapy, there is little published evidence to justify the use of newer therapies. This echoes the conclusion of a recent Cochrane review and the systematic review undertaken by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence Guidelines Committee in the UK. Analysis of evidence presents considerable difficulties in this field particularly as controlled studies are few and the majority are of poor methodological quality.