Search Results
You are looking at 21 - 23 of 23 items for
- Author or Editor: Lawrence A. Lavery x
- Refine by access: All Content x
Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and recovery of acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients admitted to the hospital with and without diabetes mellitus (DM) with foot infections.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 294 patients with DM and 88 without DM admitted to the hospital with foot infections. The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines were used to define AKI. Recovery was divided into three categories: full, partial, and no recovery within 90 days of the index AKI.
Results: The AKI incidence was 3.0 times higher in patients with DM (DM 48.5% versus no DM 23.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.74–5.19; P < .01). Acute kidney injury incidence was similar at each stage in people with and without DM (stage 1, DM 58.1% versus no DM 47.6%; stage 2, DM 23.3% versus no DM 33.3%, and stage 3, DM 18.6% versus no DM 19.1%). Twenty-nine patients with diabetes had a second AKI event and four had a third event. In patients without DM, one patient had a second AKI. Cumulative AKI incidence was 4.7 times higher in people with DM (DM 60.9% versus no DM 25.0%; 95% CI, 2.72–8.03; P < .01). Patients with diabetes progressed to chronic kidney disease or in chronic kidney disease stage 39.4% of the time. Patients without diabetes progressed 16.7% of the time, but this trend was not significant (P = .07). Complete recovery was 3.8 times more likely in patients without diabetes (95% CI, 1.26–11.16; P = .02).
Conclusions: Acute kidney injury incidence is higher in patients with diabetes, and complete recovery after an AKI is less likely compared to patients without diabetes.
The publication of the Global Vascular Guidelines in 2019 provide evidence-based, best practice recommendations on the diagnosis and treatment of chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Certainly, the multidisciplinary team, and more specifically one with collaborating podiatrists and vascular specialists, has been shown to be highly effective at improving the outcomes of limbs at risk for amputation. This article uses the Guidelines to answer key questions for podiatrists who are caring for the patient with CLTI.
Background: To evaluate clinicians' compliance to follow national guidelines for tetanus vaccination prophylaxis in high-risk foot patients. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 114 consecutive patients between June 2011 and March 2019 who presented with a foot infection resulting from a puncture injury through the emergency department. Eighty-three patients had diabetes mellitus and 31 patients did not have diabetes mellitus. Electronic medical records were used to collect a broad range of study data on patient demographics, previous medical history, previous tetanus immunization history and tetanus status upon presentation to the emergency department (ED), peripheral arterial disease, sensory neuropathy, laboratory values, and clinical / surgical outcomes. Results: 46.5% of the patients who presented to the ED with a puncture wound did not have up-to-date tetanus immunization. Of those patients, 79.2% received a tetanus-containing vaccine booster, 3.8% received intramuscular tetanus immunoglobulins (TIG), 3.8% received both tetanus-containing vaccine booster and TIG, and 20.8% received no form of tetanus prophylaxis. When comparing data between patients with and without diabetes, there were no statistical significant differences in tetanus prophylaxis. Conclusion: Guidelines for tetanus prophylaxis amongst high-risk foot patients in this study center are not followed in all patients. Patients with DM are at high risks of exposure to tetanus, we recommend physicians to take a detailed tetanus immunization history and vaccinate them if tetanus history is unclear.
