Efficacy and safety of a porcine peritoneum-derived matrix in diabetic foot ulcer treatment: a pilot study

Lights, fluorescence, action-Influencing wound treatment plans including debridement of bacteria and biofilms

High bacterial loads within chronic wounds increase the risk of infection and complication. Detection and localization of bacterial loads through point-of-care fluorescence (FL) imaging can objectively inform and support bacterial treatment decisions. This single time-point, retrospective analysis describes the treatment decisions made on 1000 chronic wounds (DFUs, VLUs, PIs, surgical wounds, burns, and others) at 211 wound-care facilities across 36 US states. Clinical assessment findings and treatment plans derived from them, as well as subsequent FL-imaging (MolecuLight®) findings and any associated treatment plan changes, were recorded for analysis. FL signals indicating elevated bacterial loads were observed in 701 wounds (70.8%), while only 293 (29.6%) showed signs/symptoms of infection. After FL-imaging, treatment plans changed in 528 wounds as follows: more extensive debridement (18.7%), more extensive hygiene (17.2%), FL-targeted debridement (17.2%), new topical therapies (10.1%), new systemic antibiotic prescriptions (9.0%), FL-guided sampling for microbiological analysis (6.2%), and changes in dressing selection (3.2%). These real-world findings of asymptomatic bacterial load/biofilm incidence, and of the frequent treatment plan changes post-imaging, are in accordance with clinical trial findings using this technology. These data, from a range of wound types, facilities, and clinician skill sets, suggest that point-of-care FL-imaging information improves bacterial infection management.

Innovative Functional Biomaterials as Therapeutic Wound Dressings for Chronic Diabetic Foot Ulcers

The imbalance of local and systemic factors in individuals with diabetes mellitus (DM) delays, or even interrupts, the highly complex and dynamic process of wound healing, leading to diabetic foot ulceration (DFU) in 15 to 25% of cases. DFU is the leading cause of non-traumatic amputations worldwide, posing a huge threat to the well-being of individuals with DM and the healthcare system. Moreover, despite all the latest efforts, the efficient management of DFUs still remains a clinical challenge, with limited success rates in treating severe infections. Biomaterial-based wound dressings have emerged as a therapeutic strategy with rising potential to handle the tricky macro and micro wound environments of individuals with DM. Indeed, biomaterials have long been related to unique versatility, biocompatibility, biodegradability, hydrophilicity, and wound healing properties, features that make them ideal candidates for therapeutic applications. Furthermore, biomaterials may be used as a local depot of biomolecules with anti-inflammatory, pro-angiogenic, and antimicrobial properties, further promoting adequate wound healing. Accordingly, this review aims to unravel the multiple functional properties of biomaterials as promising wound dressings for chronic wound healing, and to examine how these are currently being evaluated in research and clinical settings as cutting-edge wound dressings for DFU management.

Use of fluorescence imaging to optimize location of tissue sampling in hard-to-heal wounds

Introduction

Wound microflora in hard-to-heal wounds is invariably complex and diverse. Determining the interfering organisms(s) is therefore challenging. Tissue sampling, particularly in large wounds, is subjective and, when performed, might involve swabbing or biopsy of several locations. Fluorescence (FL) imaging of bacterial loads is a rapid, non-invasive method to objectively locate microbial hotspots (loads >104 CFU/gr). When sampling is deemed clinically necessary, imaging may indicate an optimal site for tissue biopsy. This study aimed to investigate the microbiology of wound tissue incisional biopsies taken from sites identified by FL imaging compared with sites selected by clinical judgment.

Methods

A post hoc analysis of the 350-patient FLAAG wound trial was conducted; 78 wounds were included in the present study. All 78 wounds were biopsied at two sites: one at the center of the wound per standard of care (SoC) and one site guided by FL-imaging findings, allowing for comparison of total bacterial load (TBL) and species present.

Results

The comparison between the two biopsy sites revealed that clinical uncertainty was higher as wound surface area increased. The sensitivity of a FL-informed biopsy was 98.7% for accurately finding any bacterial loads >104 CFU/g, compared to 87.2% for SoC (p=0.0059; McNemar test). Regarding species detected, FL-informed biopsies detected an average of 3 bacterial species per biopsy versus 2.2 species with SoC (p < 0.001; t-test). Microbial hotspots with a higher number of pathogens also included the CDC's pathogens of interest.

Conclusions & perspective

FL imaging provides a more accurate and relevant microbiological profile that guides optimal wound sampling compared to clinical judgment. This is particularly interesting in large, complex wounds, as evidenced in the wounds studied in this post hoc analysis. In addition, fluorescence imaging enables earlier bacterial detection and intervention, guiding early and appropriate wound hygiene and potentially reducing the need for antibiotic use. When indicated, this diagnostic partnership with antibiotic stewardship initiatives is key to ameliorating the continuing threat of antibiotic resistance.

Guidelines for Point-of-Care Fluorescence Imaging for Detection of Wound Bacterial Burden Based on Delphi Consensus

Excessive levels of bacteria impede wound healing and can lead to infectious complications. Unfortunately, clinical signs and symptoms of elevated bacterial burden are often unreliable. As a result, point--of--care fluorescence imaging, used to detect critical bacterial burden in wounds, is becoming widely recognized and adopted by clinicians across the globe as an accepted and added component of wound assessment protocol. A Delphi method was employed to establish consensus guidelines describing fluorescence imaging use. A multidisciplinary panel of 32 wound experts (56% MD, 22% podiatrist, 12.5% nurses/nurse practitioners) representing multiple sites of service (e.g., hospital outpatient, inpatient, private office, long-term care) completed two rounds of online questionnaires. The Delphi included key topics, including competencies required to perform imaging, clinical indications for imaging (e.g., signs/symptoms present, procedures warranting imaging), frequency of imaging, and a clinical workflow algorithm. Describing their clinical experiences of imaging impact, >80% reported changes in treatment plans, 96% reported that imaging-informed treatment plans led to improved wound healing, 78% reported reduced rates of amputations, and 83% reported reduced rates of microbiological sampling. The guidelines provided here will help to standardize use of fluorescence imaging among wound care providers and enhance the quality of patient care.