Background: Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are main cause of hospitalizations and amputations in diabetic patients. Failure of standard foot care is the most important cause of impaired DFUs healing. Dakin's solution (DS; sodium hypochlorite) is a promising broad spectrum bactericidal antiseptic for DFUs management. Studies investigating the efficacy of using DS solution on DFUs healing process are scarce. Accordingly, this is the first evidence based randomized control trial study conducted to evaluate the effect of using diluted DS compared with the standard care in the management of infected DFUs. Methods: Randomized control trial study was conducted to assess the efficacy of DS in the management of infected DFUs. Patients were randomly distributed to control group (DFUs irrigated with normal saline) and intervention group (DFUs irrigated with 0.1% DS). Patients were followed for at least 24 weeks for healing, reinfection or amputations. In-vitro antimicrobial testing on DS was performed including determination of its minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC), minimum biofilm inhibitory concentration (MBIC), minimum biofilm eradication concentration (MBEC) and suspension test. Results: Replacing normal saline irrigation in DFU standard care with 0.1% DS followed by soaking the ulcer with commercial sodium hypochlorite (0.08 %) after patient discharge significantly improved ulcer healing (p< 0.001) and decreased number of amputations and hospitalizations (p< 0.001). The endpoint of death from any cause (RR 0.13; p = 0.029) and the amputation rate (RR 0.27; p<0.001) were also significantly reduced. The effect on ulcer closure (OR 11.9; p<0.001) was significantly enhanced in comparison to the control group. Moreover, DS irrigation for inpatients, significantly decreased bacterial load (p< 0.001), The in-vitro analysis results of DS were: MIC (1.44%), MBC (2.88%), MBIC (1.08%) and MBEC (2.87%). Conclusions: Compared with standard care, diluted DS (0.1%) was more effective in the management of infected DFUs. DS (0.1%) irrigation with debridement followed by standard care is a promising method in the management of infected DFUs.
BACKGROUND: Multiple organizations have issued guidelines to address the prevention, diagnosis and management of diabetic foot ulcers. These guidelines are based on evidence review and expert opinion. <p>METHODS: Literature review was conducted and guidelines were reviewed to identify consensus (or lack thereof) on the nature of these recommendations, the strength of the recommendations and the level of evidence.</p> <p>RESULTS: Most guidelines were not based on highest level of evidence (randomized controlled trials). A listing of recommendations for prevention, diagnosis and management was created with evidence basis for all recommendations.</p> <p>CONCLUSIONS: Areas for future research were identified among recommendations based on minimal evidence, areas of controversy, or in areas of clinical care without recommendations.</p>
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.
Background: While numerous studies suggest the benefit of electrical stimulation (E-Stim) therapy to accelerate wound healing, the underlying mechanism of action is still debated. In this pilot study, we examined the potential effectiveness of lower extremity E-Stim therapy to improve tissue perfusion in patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). Methods: Thirty-eight patients with DFUs were recruited. Participants underwent 60-minutes of active E-Stim therapy provided on acupuncture points above the level of the ankle joint using a bio-electric stimulation technology® (BEST) platform (Tennant Biomodulator® PRO). As primary outcome, changes in perfusion in response to E-Stim were assessed by measuring skin perfusion pressure (SPP) at baseline, 30-, and 60-min during therapy. In addition, retention was assessed 10-min post-therapy. As secondary outcome, tissue oxygen saturation (SatO2) was measured using a non-invasive near-infrared camera (Snapshot NIR, KENT Imaging Inc). Results: SPP increased in response to E-Stim therapy (p = 0.02) with maximum improvement observed at 60-min (11%, p = 0.007) compared to baseline. SPP reduced at 10-min post therapy, but remained higher than baseline (9%, p = 0.1). Magnitude of improvement at 60-min was negatively correlated with baseline SPP values (r = -0.45, p = 0.01) suggesting those with lower perfusion could benefit more from E-Stim therapy. Similar trends were observed for SatO2 with statistically significant improvement for a sub-sample (n=16) with moderate-severe peripheral arterial disease (Ankle brachial index < 0.8 or > 1.4). Conclusions: This study provides early results on the feasibility and effectiveness of E-Stim therapy to improve skin perfusion and SatO2. The magnitude of benefit is higher among those with poorer skin perfusion. Results also suggest the effects of E-Stim could be washed out after stopping therapy and thus regular daily application may be required for the effective benefit for wound healing.
The coronavirus disease of 2019 pandemic is driving significant change in the health-care 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, emergency room visits, hospitalizations, length-of-stay, and costs. However, 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 coronavirus disease of 2019 risk. The goal of podiatrists during the pandemic is to reduce the burden on the health-care system by keeping diabetic foot and wound patients safe, functional, and at home.
The coronavirus disease of 2019 pandemic has disrupted health care, with its far-reaching effects seeping into chronic disease evaluation and treatment. Our tertiary wound care center was specially designed to deliver the highest quality care to wounded patients. Before the pandemic, we were able to ensure rapid treatment by means of validated protocols delivered by a colocalized multidisciplinary team within the hospital setting. The pandemic has disrupted our model’s framework, and we have worked to adapt our workflow without sacrificing quality of care. Using the modified Donabedian model of quality assessment, we present an analysis of prepandemic and intrapandemic characteristics of our center. In this way, we hope other providers can use this framework for identifying evolving problems within their practice so that quality care can continue to be delivered to all patients.
Background: Chronic lower-extremity defects may lead to major amputations and have severe consequences on patient quality of life and mortality. Dermal matrices have become part of the reconstructive ladder and are often deployed in these scenarios to quickly build neodermis, especially in volumetric defects over exposed bone and tendon initially, to allow for subsequent closure by means of split-thickness skin grafting (STSG) or secondary intention. Ovine forestomach matrix (OFM) is a decellularized extracellular matrix (ECM) bioscaffold available in both sheet and particulate forms that can be used as a dermal matrix in various soft-tissue reconstruction procedures.
Methods: This retrospective case series evaluated the use of OFM products in the surgical reconstruction of 50 cases (n = 50) comprised of challenging lower-extremity defects from seven healthcare centers. Patient records were reviewed to identify comorbidities, defect cause, defect size, presence of exposed structures, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention contamination score, Wagner grade, OFM graft use, time to 100% granulation tissue, STSG use, overall time to heal, and postoperative complications. The primary study outcomes were time (days) to 100% granulation tissue formation, with secondary outcomes including overall time to wound closure (weeks), STSG take at 1 week, and complications.
Results: The results of this case series demonstrate OFM as a clinically effective treatment in the surgical management of complex lower-extremity soft-tissue defects with exposed structures in patients with multiple comorbidities. One application of OFM products was effective in regenerating well-vascularized neodermis, often in the presence of exposed structures, with a mean time to 100% granulation of 26.0 ± 22.2 days.
Conclusions: These data support the use of OFM as a safe, cost-effective, and clinically effective treatment option for coverage in complex soft-tissue wounds, including exposed vital structures, and to shorten the time to definitive wound closure in complicated patient populations.
Background: Along with significant case transmission, hospitalizations, and mortality experienced during the global severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 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 I 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 were divided into prepandemic (n = 120) and pandemic groups (n = 150). Data regarding 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 undergoing a major amputation was 3.1 times higher than before the pandemic. In addition, 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 prepandemic group.
Conclusions: The effect of the pandemic on the health-care system has had a deleterious effect on people with diabetes mellitus (DM)–related foot problems, resulting in more severe infections and more emergencies, and necessitating more amputations. When an amputation was performed, the likelihood that it was a major amputation also increased.
As of 2016, Medicaid accounted for nearly 20% of state general fund budgets. Optional Medicaid services such as podiatry are often subject to cost-cutting measures in periods of economic downturn, as was the case in the wake of the 2007 financial crisis. Although the cuts were intended as a cost-saving measure, research indicates that they had the opposite effect. The restriction and limitation of these services during the Great Recession resulted in both poorer health outcomes for beneficiaries, and poorer financial outcomes for state Medicaid programs. With states citing record levels of unemployment as of April of 2020 and projecting significant declines in annual revenue in 2021, the economic conditions resulting from the coronavirus disease of 2019 pandemic are likely to rival those of the Great Recession. Given the historical precedent for restricting or eliminating optional Medicaid services as a cost-saving measure, it is likely that podiatric services will once again come under scrutiny. Previous efforts by state-level podiatric societies have proven successful in lobbying for the reinstatement of coverage under Medicaid by conveying evidence of the negative outcomes associated with elimination to stakeholders. The specialty must once again engage policymakers by drawing on evidence gleaned and lessons learned from past cuts of optional Medicaid services to avert counterproductive coverage restrictions intended to mitigate the financial impact of the coronavirus disease of 2019 pandemic.