Hard-to-heal wounds: a randomised trial of an oral proline-containing supplement to aid repair

The role of Bromelain and Liposomal Vitamin C in the treatment of chronic venous disease

Chronic venous disease (CVD) is a prevalent condition leading to significant morbidity and affecting quality of life. Among conservative treatment strategies, venoactive drugs are often recommended by major guidelines for the management of CVD. Bromelain and vitamin C are now emerging as promising options in the management of several chronic diseases owing to their anti-inflammatory, immunoregulatory, and antioxidant properties, though evidence remains scarce in this setting. This systematic review of the literature, endorsed by the Italian Society of Angiology and Vascular Medicine (Societa Italiana di Angiologia e Patologia Vascolare, SIAPAV), aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of these compounds in the treatment of CVD. A comprehensive search yielded nine studies, two on bromelain and seven on vitamin C. No studies have evaluated the effects of bromelain and vitamin C alone or in combination, whereas both molecules were administered in combination with other nutritional supplements. Overall, CVD-related symptoms and edema seem to improve with dietary supplement containing these two compounds, with no major safety issues reported. Bromelain and vitamin C may thus represent attractive options in the management of patients with symptomatic CVD and/or presence of venous edema, provided optimal conservative treatment is in place. Dedicated clinical studies are needed to clarify the efficacy and safety of a combination of these molecules in CVD management.

The Use of a Specialized Oral Nutritional Supplement in the Management of Chronic Wounds in Patients With and Without Diabetes Mellitus: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the cost-effectiveness of the use of a specialized oral nutritional supplement (ONS) with proline, arginine, vitamins, and micronutrients to stimulate the healing of chronic wounds in patients with and without diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

This is a quantitative study on cost-effectiveness. This model used a decision-tree model followed by a budget impact analysis from the Brazilian public healthcare system's perspective. For this analysis, the population and data from a randomized trial of an oral specialized-ONS-containing supplement were considered. For budget impact analysis, an epidemiologic approach was used to estimate the eligible population. The eligible population comprised 3 different groups: patients with pressure ulcers, patients with vascular ulcers, and patients with diabetic feet. The budget impact analysis used the results of the cost-effectiveness analysis.

RESULTS

The results demonstrate that the use of specialized ONS, when compared with control ONS, proved to be cost saving (cheaper and more effective), considering the presence of predictive scar factor. The aggregated budget impact analysis results shows that the total reduction of costs after 5 years is USD 332 628 437.00.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a specialized ONS was cost-effective in the healing of chronic wounds, when compared with control. The budget impact analysis showed a significant decrease in costs in a 5-year time horizon for the management of pressure ulcers, vascular ulcers, and diabetic feet.

Impact of oral nutritional supplement composition on healing of different chronic wounds: A systematic review

Chronic wounds are characterized by prolonged non-healing, significantly affecting patients' quality of life. Oral formulas may enhance the wound healing process and contribute to cost reduction in care. This review aimed to evaluate the effects of oral nutritional supplementation on chronic wound healing and provide insights into formula characteristics. A comprehensive search across Cinahl, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases yielded nine studies from the past decade involving 741 patients ages 52 to 81.7 across various care settings: hospitals, long-term care facilities, and home care. Primary wound types included pressure injuries (58%), diabetic foot ulcers (40%), and venous ulcers (2%). The intervention duration ranged from 2 to 16 wk, with sample sizes varying from 24 to 270 patients. Notably, four studies reported a reduction in wound area and an increased healing rate with a hypercaloric, hyperproteic formula enriched with zinc and vitamins A, C, and E. However, two studies found no significant differences compared with control groups. Two other studies investigated a combination of arginine, glutamine, and β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate; however, they did not yield significant results, and one study favored a hyperproteic formula instead of a hyperproteic formula with arginine. This review provides evidence supporting the potential of oral nutritional supplementation to enhance the healing process of chronic wounds. Based on our findings, a desirable formula should be characterized by a high calorie and protein content and the inclusion of antioxidant micronutrients, including, but not limited to, vitamins A, E, C, and zinc.

Nutritional interventions for preventing and treating pressure ulcers

BACKGROUND

Pressure ulcers are localized injuries to the skin or the underlying tissue, or both, and are common in older and immobile people, people with diabetes, vascular disease, or malnutrition, as well as those who require intensive or palliative care. People with pressure ulcers often suffer from severe pain and exhibit social avoidance behaviours. The prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers involves strategies to optimize hydration, circulation, and nutrition. Adequate nutrient intake can reduce the risk factor of malnutrition and promote wound healing in existing pressure ulcers. However, it is unclear which nutrients help prevent and treat pressure ulcers. This is an update of an earlier Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of nutritional interventions (special diets, supplements) for preventing and treating pressure ulcers in people with or without existing pressure ulcers compared to standard diet or other nutritional interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We used extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search was in May 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in people with or without existing pressure ulcers, that compared nutritional interventions aimed at preventing or treating pressure ulcers with standard diet or other types of nutritional interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome for prevention studies was the proportion of participants who developed new (incident) pressure ulcers. For treatment studies, our primary outcomes were time to complete pressure ulcer healing, number of people with healed pressure ulcers, size and depth of pressure ulcers, and rate of pressure ulcer healing. Secondary outcomes were side effects, costs, health-related quality of life and acceptability. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 33 RCTs with 7920 participants. Data for meta-analysis were available from 6993 participants. Pressure ulcer prevention Eleven studies (with 12 arms) compared six types of nutritional interventions for the prevention of pressure ulcers. Compared to standard diet, energy, protein and micronutrient supplements may result in little to no difference in the proportion of participants developing a pressure ulcer (energy, protein and micronutrient supplements 248 per 1000, standard diet 269 per 1000; RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.19; 3 studies, 1634 participants; low-certainty evidence). Compared to standard diet, protein supplements may result in little to no difference in pressure ulcer incidence (protein 21 per 1000, standard diet 28 per 1000; RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.14; 4 studies, 4264 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the gastrointestinal side effects of these supplements (protein 109 per 1000, standard diet 155 per 1000; RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.06 to 7.96; 2 studies, 140 participants, very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of protein, arginine, zinc and antioxidants; L-carnitine, L-leucine, calcium, magnesium and vitamin D; EPA, GLA and antioxidants; disease-specific supplements on pressure ulcer incidence when compared to standard diet (1 study each; very low-certainty evidence for all comparisons). Pressure ulcer treatment Twenty-four studies (with 27 arms) compared 10 types of nutritional interventions or supplements for treatment of pressure ulcers. Compared to standard diet, energy, protein and micronutrient supplements may slightly increase the number of healed pressure ulcers (energy, protein and micronutrients 366 per 1000, standard diet 253 per 1000; RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.85; 3 studies, 577 participants, low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of these supplements on gastrointestinal side effects. Compared to standard diet, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of protein, arginine, zinc and antioxidant supplements on pressure ulcer healing (pressure ulcer area: mean difference (MD) 2 cm² smaller, 95% CI 4.54 smaller to 0.53 larger; 2 studies, 71 participants, very low-certainty evidence). The evidence on side effects of these supplements is very uncertain. Compared to standard diet, supplements with arginine and micronutrients may not increase the number of healed pressure ulcers, but the evidence suggests a slight reduction in pressure ulcer area (MD 15.8% lower, 95% CI 25.11 lower to 6.48 lower; 2 studies, 231 participants, low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about changes in pressure ulcer scores, acceptability, and side effects of these supplements. Compared to placebo, collagen supplements probably improve the mean change in pressure ulcer area (MD 1.81 cm² smaller, 95% CI 3.36 smaller to 0.26 smaller; 1 study, 74 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of these supplements on side effects. The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of vitamin C, different doses of arginine; EPA, GLA (special dietary fatty acids) and antioxidants; protein; a specialized amino acid mixture; ornithine alpha-ketoglutarate and zinc supplements on pressure ulcer healing (1 or 2 studies each; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The benefits of nutritional interventions with various compositions for pressure ulcer prevention and treatment are uncertain. There may be little or no difference compared to standard nutrition or placebo. Nutritional supplements may not increase gastrointestinal side effects, but the evidence is very uncertain. Larger studies with similar nutrient compositions would reduce these uncertainties. No study investigated the effects of special diets (e.g. protein-enriched diet, vegetarian diet) on pressure ulcer incidence and healing.

Proline metabolism shapes the tumor microenvironment: from collagen deposition to immune evasion

Proline is a nonessential amino acid, and its metabolism has been implicated in numerous malignancies. Together with a direct role in regulating cancer cells' proliferation and survival, proline metabolism plays active roles in shaping the tumor microenvironment (TME). Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) display high rates of proline biosynthesis to support the production of collagen for the extracellular matrix (ECM). Indeed, impaired proline metabolism in CAFs results in reduced collagen deposition and compromises the growth and metastatic spread of cancer. Moreover, the rate of proline metabolism regulates intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels, which influence the production and release of cytokines from cancer cells, contributing toward an immune-permissive TME. Hence, targeting proline metabolism is a promising anticancer strategy that could improve patients' outcome and response to immunotherapy.