This editorial accompanies "Diabetes-Related Major and Minor Amputation Risk Increased During the COVID-19 Pandemic," by Dominick J. Casciato, DPM, Sara Yancovitz, DPM, John Thompson, DPM, Steven Anderson, DPM, Alex Bischoff, DPM, Shauna Ayres, MPH, CHES, and Ian Barron, DPM, available at https://doi.org/10.7547/20-224
Background: Along with significant case transmission, hospitalizations, and mortality experienced during the global Sars-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic, there existed a disruption in the delivery of health care across multiple specialties. We studied the effect of the pandemic on inpatients with diabetic foot problems in a level-one trauma center in Central Ohio. Methods: A retrospective chart review of patients necessitating a consultation by the foot and ankle surgery service were reviewed from the first 8 months of 2020. A total of 270 patients met the inclusion criteria and divided into pre-pandemic (n = 120) and pandemic groups (n = 150). Demographics, medical history, severity of current infection, and medical or surgical management were collected and analyzed.Results: The odds of undergoing any level of amputation was 10.8 times higher during the pandemic versus before the pandemic. The risk of major amputations (below-the-knee or higher) likewise increased with an odds ratio of 12.5 among all patients in the foot and ankle service during the pandemic. Of the patients undergoing any amputation, the odds for receiving a major amputation was 3.1 times higher than before the pandemic. Additionally, the severity of infections increased during the pandemic and a larger proportion of the cases were classified as emergent in the pandemic group compared to the pre-pandemic group.Conclusions: The effect of the pandemic on the health-care system has had a deleterious effect on people with diabetes-related foot problems resulting in more severe infections, more emergencies, and necessitating more amputations. When an amputation was performed, the likelihood it was a major amputation also increased.Editor's Note: This Original Article accompanies "Diabetes-Related Amputations: A Pandemic within a Pandemic," by Lee C. Rogers, DPM, Robert J. Snyder, DPM, and Warren S. Joseph, DPM, FIDSA, available at https://doi.org/10.7547/20-248
Background: The purpose of this retrospective audit was to compare patient based clinical outcomes to amputation healing outcomes twelve months after a minor foot amputation in people with diabetes.
Methods: Hospital admission and community outpatient data were extracted for all minor foot amputations in people with diabetes in 2017 in the Central Coast Local Health District.
Results: A total 85 minor foot amputations involving 74 people were identified. At the twelve-month follow-up 74% (n=56) of the minor foot amputations healed, 63% (n=41) of the participants achieved a good clinical outcome (healed, no more proximal amputations, or death within the 12 month follow up period), and the mortality rate was 18%. Poor clinical outcomes were associated with those aged greater than 60 (RR 5.75, 95% CI: 0.85 to 38.7, p=0.013), those undergoing a further surgical debridement procedure during their hospital stay (RR 2.42, 95% CI: 1.3 to 4.4, p=0.005) and those who did not attend CCLHD Podiatry clinics post-amputation (RR 2.3, 95% CI: 1.2 to 4.1, p=0.010).
Conclusions: To improve patient based clinical outcomes post-minor foot amputation, targeted follow-up in a high-risk foot clinic, and tailored discharge treatment plans for people aged over 60 or those undergoing a debridement procedure may be considered.
Background: The objective of this investigation was to evaluate adverse short-term outcomes following open lower extremity bypass surgery in subjects with diabetes mellitus with a specific comparison performed based on subject height.
Methods: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was analyzed to select those subjects with CPT codes 35533, 35540, 35556, 35558, 35565, 35566, 35570 and 35571 and with the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus. This resulted in 83 subjects ≤60 inches, 1084 subjects >60 inches and <72 inches, and 211 subjects ≥72 inches.
Results: No differences were observed between groups with respect to the development of a superficial surgical site infection (9.6% vs. vs. 6.4% vs. 5.7%; p=0.458), deep incisional infection (1.2% vs. 1.4% vs. 2.8%; p=0.289), sepsis (2.4% vs. 2.0% vs. 2.8%; p=0.751), unplanned reoperation (19.3% vs. 15.6% vs. 21.8%; p=0.071), nor unplanned hospital readmission (19.3% vs. 14.8% vs. 17.1%; p=0.573). A significant difference was observed between groups with respect to the development of a wound disruption (4.8% vs. 1.3% vs. 4.7%; p=0.001). A multivariate regression analysis was performed of the wound disruption outcome with the age, gender, race, ethnicity, height, weight, current smoker and open wound/wound infection variables. Race (p=0.025) and weight (p=0.003) were found to be independently associated with wound disruption, but height was not (p=0.701).
Conclusions: The results of this investigation demonstrate no significant difference in short-term adverse outcomes following the performance of lower extremity bypass surgery based on patient height.
The COVID-19 pandemic is driving significant change in the healthcare system and disrupting the best practices for diabetic limb preservation, leaving large numbers of patients without care. Patients with diabetes and foot ulcers are at increased risk for infections, hospitalization, amputations, and death. Podiatric care is associated with fewer diabetes-related amputations, ER visits, hospitalizations, length-of-stay, and costs. But podiatrists must mobilize and adopt the new paradigm of shifts away from hospital care to community-based care. Implementing the proposed Pandemic Diabetic Foot Triage System, in-home visits, higher acuity office visits, telemedicine, and remote patient monitoring can help podiatrists manage patients while reducing the COVID-19 risk. The goal of podiatrists during the pandemic is to reduce the burden on the healthcare system by keeping diabetic foot and wound patients safe, functional, and at home.
ObjectiveTo compare pathogens involved in skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) and pedal osteomyelitis (OM) in patients with and without diabetes with puncture wounds to the foot. MethodsWe evaluated 113 consecutive patients between June 2011 and March 2019 with foot infection (SSTI and OM) from a puncture injury sustained to the foot. Eighty-three patients had diabetes (DM) and 30 did not (NDM). We evaluated the bacterial pathogens in patients with skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI) and pedal osteomyelitis (OM). ResultsPolymicrobial infection were more common in patients with diabetes mellitus (83.1% vs 53.3%, p=.001). The most common pathogen for SSTI and OM in DM was s. aureus (SSTI 50.7%, OM 32.3%), whereas in NDM patients it was Pseudomonas (25%) for SSTI. Anaerobes (9.4%) and fungal (3.1%) infection were uncommon. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was only identified in 5.8% of people with diabetes. ConclusionsThe most common bacterial pathogen in both SSTIs and pedal OM was staphylococcus aureus in patients with DM. Pseudomonas spp., was the most common pathogen in people without diabetes with SSTIs.
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.
BACKGROUND:Diabetic foot ulceration is a severe complication of diabetes characterized by chronic inflammation and impaired wound healing. This study aims to evaluate the effect of a medical device gel based on Adelmidrol + Trans traumatic acid in the healing process of diabetic foot ulcers. METHODS: Thirty-seven diabetic patients with foot ulcers of mild/moderate grade were treated with the gel applied daily for 4 weeks on the affected area. The following parameters were evaluated at baseline and weekly: a) wound area, measured drawing a map of the ulcer then calculated with Photoshop6 tools, b) clinical appearance of the ulcer, assessed recording the presence/absence of dry/wet necrosis, infection, fibrin, neoepithelium, exudate, redness, granulation tissue. RESULTS: Topical treatment led to progressive healing of diabetic foot ulcers with a significant reduction of the wound area and an improvement in the clinical appearance of the ulcers. No adverse events treatment-related were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this open-label study show the potential benefits of Adelmidrol + Trans traumatic acid topical administration to promote re-epithelialization of diabetic foot ulcers. Further studies need to confirm the observed results.
People suffering from diabetes are at risk of developing foot ulcerations, which, if left untreated, could also lead to amputation. Monitoring of the foot temperature can help in the prevention of these foot complications, and various studies have shown that elevated temperatures may be indicative of ulceration. Over the years there have been various devices that were designed for foot temperature monitoring, both for clinical and home use. The technologies used vary from infrared (IR) thermometry, liquid crystal thermography (LCT), IR thermography and a vast range of analogue and digital temperature sensors that were incorporated in different measurement platforms. All these systems are able to collect thermal data from the foot, some being able to acquire data only when the foot is stationary and others being able to acquire from the foot in motion, which can give a more in-depth insight to any emerging problems. The aim of this review is to evaluate the available literature related to the technologies used in these systems, outlining the benefits of each and what further developments may be required to make the foot temperature analysis more effective.