Comparison of the clinical effectiveness of different off-loading devices for the treatment of neuropathic foot ulcers in patients with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/APMA/ABC/SCAI/SVM/SVN/SVS/SIR/VESS Guideline for the Management of Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2024 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/APMA/ABC/SCAI/SVM/SVN/SVS/SIR/VESS Guideline for the Management of Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with lower extremity peripheral artery disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, chronic symptomatic, chronic limb-threatening ischemia, and acute limb ischemia).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from October 2020 to June 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that was published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2023 during the peer review process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from the "2016 AHA/ACC Guideline on the Management of Patients With Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with peripheral artery disease have been developed.

2024 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/APMA/ABC/SCAI/SVM/SVN/SVS/SIR/VESS Guideline for the Management of Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2024 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/APMA/ABC/SCAI/SVM/SVN/SVS/SIR/VESS Guideline for the Management of Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with lower extremity peripheral artery disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, chronic symptomatic, chronic limb-threatening ischemia, and acute limb ischemia).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from October 2020 to June 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that was published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2023 during the peer review process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables where appropriate.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from the "2016 AHA/ACC Guideline on the Management of Patients With Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with peripheral artery disease have been developed.

Offloading systems for the treatment of neuropathic foot ulcers in patients with diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for the development of the Italian guidelines for the treatment of diabetic foot syndrome

AIM

To compare the effectiveness of commonly used offloading devices for the treatment of neuropathic foot ulcers in patients with diabetes mellitus. This meta-analysis (MA) has been performed for giving an answer to clinical questions on this topic of the Italian guideline on diabetic foot syndrome.

METHODS

The present MA includes randomized controlled studies (duration > 12 weeks) comparing, in patients with diabetes mellitus and non-infected neuropathic foot ulcer: any offloading device vs either no offloading device or conventional footwear; removable versus non-removable offloading devices; surgical procedure vs other offloading approaches. The primary endpoint was ulcer healing.

RESULTS

A total of 184 studies were identified, and 18 were considered eligible for the analysis. We found that: any plantar off-loading, when compared to the absence of plantar offloading device, is associated with a higher ulcer healing (MH-OR: 3.13 [1.08, 9.11], p = 0.04, I2 = 0%); total contact cast or nonremovable knee-high walker, compared to other offloading devices, had a higher ulcer healing rate (MH-OR: 2.64 [1.43, 4.89], p = 0.002, I2 = 51%); surgical offloading for active ulcers in combination with post-surgery offloading achieves higher ulcer healing rate when compared to offloading devices alone (MH-OR: 6.77 [1.64, 27.93], p = 0.008, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Any plantar offloading, compared to the absence of plantar offloading device, is associated with a higher ulcer healing rate. Total contact cast or nonremovable knee-high walker, compared to other offloading devices, is preferable. Surgical offloading for active ulcers, in combination with post-surgery offloading devices, achieves a higher ulcer healing rate when compared to other offloading devices alone. Further studies with a larger cohort of patients with diabetic neuropathic foot ulcers and extended follow-up periods are necessary.

Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery 2023 guidelines on the diabetic foot

The diabetic foot interacts with anatomical, vascular, and neurological factors that challenge clinical practice. This study aimed to compile the primary scientific evidence based on a review of the main guidelines, in addition to articles published on the Embase, Lilacs, and PubMed platforms. The European Society of Cardiology system was used to develop recommendation classes and levels of evidence. The themes were divided into six chapters (Chapter 1 - Prevention of foot ulcers in people with diabetes; Chapter 2 - Pressure relief from foot ulcers in people with diabetes; Chapter 3 -Classifications of diabetic foot ulcers; Chapter 4 - Foot and peripheral artery disease; Chapter 5 - Infection and the diabetic foot; Chapter 6 - Charcot's neuroarthropathy). This version of the Diabetic Foot Guidelines presents essential recommendations for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients with diabetic foot, offering an objective guide for medical practice.

Bibliometric analysis of systematic review and meta-analysis on diabetic foot ulcer

Many clinical management strategies have been proposed to deal with diabetic foot ulcers. However, the occurrence and recurrence of foot ulcers remain the major problems for diabetics. This study aims to identify, visualize, and characterize the meta-analyses on diabetic foot ulcer research. Articles published online were retrieved from the Web of Science core collection database using a search query incorporating MeSH terms and topics related to diabetic foot ulcers and meta-analysis. The publications were then analyzed for basic characteristics, including publication year, countries, topics covered, references, and keywords discussed in the articles. Data visualization was performed using CiteSpace. 334 meta-analyses and systematic reviews on diabetic foot ulcers were identified. The number of publications has experienced rapid growth in recent years (nearly 6-fold since 2016). The United States, China, Netherlands, England, and Australia had a strong collaboration in the contribution of publication. 7 primary topics were summarized from the top 100 highly cited publications: #1 Interventions (proportion: 59%), #2 Risk factors and Prevention (22%), #3 Epidemiology analysis (6%), #4 Cost-effectiveness of interventions (5%), #5 Long-term prognosis (3%), #6 Quality of life analysis (3%), and #7 Economic burden analysis (2%). Footwear and offloading interventions, multidisciplinary care, hyperbaric oxygen, platelet-rich plasma, and negative pressure wound therapies are highly regarded in terms of intervention. Diabetic foot osteomyelitis, peripheral diabetic neuropathy, chronic limb-threatening ischemia, and infections are the main comorbidities. In recent years, offloading interventions, debridement, telemedicine, long-term prognosis, and economic burden analyses have gradually received attention. Individualized treatment, multidisciplinary collaboration, quality of life considerations, and economic burden analyses are the long-term concerns.

Effectiveness of offloading interventions for people with diabetes-related foot ulcers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Offloading treatment is crucial to heal diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFU). This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness of offloading interventions for people with DFU.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, and trials registries for all studies relating to offloading interventions in people with DFU to address 14 clinical question comparisons. Outcomes included ulcers healed, plantar pressure, weight-bearing activity, adherence, new lesions, falls, infections, amputations, quality of life, costs, cost-effectiveness, balance, and sustained healing. Included controlled studies were independently assessed for risk of bias and had key data extracted. Meta-analyses were performed when outcome data from studies could be pooled. Evidence statements were developed using the GRADE approach when outcome data existed.

RESULTS

From 19,923 studies screened, 194 eligible studies were identified (47 controlled, 147 non-controlled), 35 meta-analyses performed, and 128 evidence statements developed. We found non-removable offloading devices likely increase ulcers healed compared to removable offloading devices (risk ratio [RR] 1.24, 95% CI 1.09-1.41; N = 14, n = 1083), and may increase adherence, cost-effectiveness and decrease infections, but may increase new lesions. Removable knee-high offloading devices may make little difference to ulcers healed compared to removable ankle-high offloading devices (RR 1.00, 0.86-1.16; N = 6, n = 439), but may decrease plantar pressure and adherence. Any offloading device may increase ulcers healed (RR 1.39, 0.89-2.18; N = 5, n = 235) and cost-effectiveness compared to therapeutic footwear and may decrease plantar pressure and infections. Digital flexor tenotomies with offloading devices likely increase ulcers healed (RR 2.43, 1.05-5.59; N = 1, n = 16) and sustained healing compared to devices alone, and may decrease plantar pressure and infections, but may increase new transfer lesions. Achilles tendon lengthening with offloading devices likely increase ulcers healed (RR 1.10, 0.97-1.27; N = 1, n = 64) and sustained healing compared to devices alone, but likely increase new heel ulcers.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-removable offloading devices are likely superior to all other offloading interventions to heal most plantar DFU. Digital flexor tenotomies and Achilles tendon lengthening in combination with offloading devices are likely superior for some specific plantar DFU locations. Otherwise, any offloading device is probably superior to therapeutic footwear and other non-surgical offloading interventions to heal most plantar DFU. However, all these interventions have low-to-moderate certainty of evidence supporting their outcomes and more high-quality trials are needed to improve our certainty for the effectiveness of most offloading interventions.

Early identification of delayed wound healing in complex diabetic foot ulcers treated with a dermal regeneration template: a novel clinical target and its risk factors

BACKGROUND

The dermal regeneration template (DRT), a tissue-engineered skin substitute composing a permanent dermal matrix and an upper temporary silicone layer that serves as the epidermis, has demonstrated efficacy in treating uncomplicated diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). Our institution has obtained good outcomes with DRT in patients with more complicated DFUs. Because of its chronicity, the authors are working to identify a clinical target that anticipates delayed healing early in the treatment in addition to determining the risk factors linked to this endpoint to increase prevention.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective single-center study analyzed patients with DFUs who underwent wound reconstruction using DRT between 2016 and 2021. The patients were categorized into poor or good graft-take groups based on their DRT status on the 21st day after the application. Their relationship with complete healing (CH) rate at day 180 was analyzed. Variables were collected for risk factors for poor graft take at day 21. Independent risk factors were identified after multivariable analysis. The causes of poor graft take were also reported.

RESULTS

This study examined 80 patients (38 and 42 patients in the poor and good graft-take groups, respectively). On day 180, the CH rate was 86.3% overall, but the poor graft-take group had a significantly lower CH rate (76.3 vs. 95.2%, P =0.021) than the good graft-take group. Our analysis identified four independent risk factors: transcutaneous oxygen pressure less than 30 mmHg (odds ratio, 154.14), off-loading device usage (0.03), diabetic neuropathy (6.51), and toe wound (0.20). The most frequent cause of poor graft take was infection (44.7%), followed by vascular compromise (21.1%) and hematoma (15.8%).

CONCLUSION

Our study introduces the novel concept of poor graft take at day 21 associated with delayed wound healing. Four independent risk factors were identified, which allows physicians to arrange interventions to mitigate their effects or select patients more precisely. DRT represents a viable alternative to address DFUs, even in complicated wounds. A subsequent split-thickness skin graft is not always necessary to achieve CH.

Off-loading and compression therapy strategies to treat diabetic foot ulcers complicated by lower limb oedema: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Lower limb oedema is a common co-morbidity in those with diabetes and foot ulceration and is linked with increased amputation risk. There is no current guidance for the treatment of concurrent diabetic foot ulcers and lower limb oedema, leading to uncertainty around the safety and efficacy of combination approaches incorporating offloading and compression therapies. To determine indications and contraindications for such strategies and identify any other supplementary treatment approaches, a scoping review was undertaken to map the evidence relating to off-loading and compression therapy strategies to treat both diabetic foot ulcers and lower limb oedema in combination.

METHODS

Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and PRISMA - Scoping Review (ScR) guidance, this review included published and unpublished literature from inception to April 2022. Literature was sourced using electronic databases including Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, AMED; websites; professional journals and reference lists of included literature. Eligible literature discussed the management of both diabetic foot ulceration and lower limb oedema and included at least one of the treatment strategies of interest. Data extraction involved recording any suggested off-loading, compression therapy or supplementary treatment strategies and any suggested indications, contraindications and cautions for their use.

RESULTS

Five hundred twenty-two publications were found relating to the management of diabetic foot ulcers with an off-loading strategy or the management of lower limb oedema with compression therapy. 51 publications were eligible for inclusion in the review. The majority of the excluded publications did not discuss the situation where diabetic foot ulceration and lower limb oedema present concurrently.

CONCLUSIONS

Most literature, focused on oedema management with compression therapy to conclude that compression therapy should be avoided in the presence of severe peripheral arterial disease. Less literature was found regarding off-loading strategies, but it was recommended that knee-high devices should be used with caution when off-loading diabetic foot ulcers in those with lower limb oedema. Treatment options to manage both conditions concurrently was identified as a research gap. Integrated working between specialist healthcare teams, was the supplementary strategy most frequently recommended. In the absence of a definitive treatment solution, clinicians are encouraged to use clinical reasoning along with support from specialist peers to establish the best, individualised treatment approach for their patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework (osf.io/crb78).

Offloading effects of a removable cast walker with and without modification for diabetes-related foot ulceration: a plantar pressure study

BACKGROUND

Removable cast walkers (RCWs), with or without modifications, are used to offload diabetes-related foot ulcers (DRFUs), however there is limited data relating to their offloading effects. This study aimed to quantify plantar pressure reductions with an RCW with and without modification for DRFUs.

METHODS

This within-participant, repeated measures study included 16 participants with plantar neuropathic DRFUs. Walking peak plantar pressures at DRFU sites were measured for four conditions: post-operative boot (control condition), RCW alone, RCW with 20 mm of felt adhered to an orthosis, and RCW with 20 mm of felt adhered to the foot.

RESULTS

Compared to the control condition, the greatest amount of peak plantar pressure reduction occurred with the RCW with felt adhered to the foot (83.1% reduction, p < .001). The RCW with felt adhered to the foot also offered greater peak plantar pressure reduction than the RCW alone (51.3%, p = .021) and the RCW with felt adhered to an orthosis (31.4%, p = .009).

CONCLUSION

The largest offloading effect recorded was with the RCW with felt adhered to the foot. High-quality randomised trials are now needed to evaluate the effectiveness of this device for healing DRFUs.

A Novel Classification for Diabetic Foot Ulcers of the First Ray

OBJECTIVE

Diabetic foot ulcers of the first ray result from several distinct biomechanical mechanisms related to anatomical deformities, which must be addressed if surgical offloading is contemplated. The objective of this study was to create a classification of the anatomical deformities of first-ray ulcers that could lead to better standardization of treatment and reporting.

METHODS

The authors performed a file review of patients with diabetic neuropathy diagnosed with first-ray ulcers over a period of 3 years in an outpatient setting. Anatomical deformities were diagnosed clinically and reported with ulcer location. The primary classification was the metatarsophalangeal joint, the interphalangeal joint, and the distal phalanx.

RESULTS

Records for 59 patients (mean age, 62 years) with University of Texas A1 and A2 ulcers were reviewed. Mean ulcer duration was 2 months. The more common deformities were hallux valgus (41%), hallux valgus interphalangeus (14%), and hallux malleus (20%), and these were primarily associated with metatarsophalangeal, interphalangeal joint, and tip-of-toe ulcers, respectively (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

By classifying ulcer locations, the relevant corrective surgery may be chosen. Although some prophylactic procedures may be safe and effective, prophylactic hallux valgus correction in the diabetic foot requires further study.

Diabetic foot ulcer: Challenges and future

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) have become one of the important causes of mortality and morbidity in patients with diabetes, and they are also a common cause of hospitalization, which places a heavy burden on patients and society. The prevention and treatment of DFUs requires multidisciplinary management. By controlling various risk factors, such as blood glucose levels, blood pressure, lipid levels and smoking cessation, local management of DFUs should be strengthened, such as debridement, dressing, revascularization, stem cell decompression and oxygen therapy. If necessary, systemic anti-infection treatment should be administered. We reviewed the progress in the clinical practice of treating DFUs in recent years, such as revascularization, wound repair, offloading, stem cell transplantation, and anti-infection treatment. We also summarized and prospectively analyzed some new technologies and measurements used in the treatment of DFUs and noted the future challenges and directions for the development of DFU treatments.

Comparing a non-removable total contact cast with a non-removable softcast in diabetic foot ulcers: A retrospective study of a prospective database

OBJECTIVE

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are mostly cured by an off-loading cast. Healing ratios of a non-removable Total Contact Softcast (TCS) were compared to a conventional Total Contact Cast (TCC), the latter reporting negative effects on lifestyle and transportation.

METHODS

Analysis of prospectively collected data for 2010-2017. Included were patients with a neuropathic DFU. Ischemic ulcers were excluded, as were Charcot arthropathy, non-plantar/non-forefoot ulcer location, and compliance issues. Patients with TCS were compared to TCC. Primary and secondary outcomes were healing ratio and healing time of DFU.

RESULTS

50 patients with 61 cast periods were included. Mean age was 63.7 ± 10.1 years. Overall successful ulcer healing was 71% (43/61). Except for depth of the DFUs, between-group patient characteristics were comparable; deeper DFUs were reported in the TCC group. This group reported 65% healed DFU (22/34), the TCS group 74% (20/27). Mean healing time was 8.4 weeks (95 %CI 5.9-10.8) for TCC and 5.5 weeks (95 %CI 4.2-6.9) for TCS (p = 0.052). Depth of the wound was a confounder.

CONCLUSIONS

TCS had a similar DFU healing ratio and a potentially clinically relevant effect (HR 1.47, 95 %CI 0.64-3.38) on healing time (ns). Ulcer depth is important for time to ulcer healing. A randomized study is recommended.

Offloading devices for neuropathic foot ulcers in adult persons with type 1 or type 2 diabetes: a rapid review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Healing time for neuropathic planter foot ulcers (NPFUs) in persons with diabetes may be reduced through use of non-removable fiberglass total contact casting (F-TCC) compared with removable cast walkers (RCWs), although the evidence base is still growing.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a rapid review and systematically searched for, and critically assessed, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of F-TCC versus RCW, focusing on the time to ulcer healing in adult persons (18+ years) with NPFUs and type 1 or type 2 diabetes. We meta-analysed the mean differences and associated 95% CIs using an inverse variance, random-effects model. We also conducted a trial sequential analysis (TSA) to assess if the available evidence is up to the required information size for a robust conclusion. We assessed and quantified statistical heterogeneity between the included studies using the I² statistic.

RESULTS

Out of 102 retrieved citations, five RCTs met the eligibility criteria. Participants' inclusion in relation to stage of ulcer was highly variable as was peripheral neuropathy complicating comparisons. F-TCC appeared to present a shorter ulcer healing time (-5.42 days, 95% CI -9.66 days to -1.17 days; I² 9.9%; 5 RCTs; 169 participants) compared with RCW. This finding was supported by the TSA.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence from RCTs to suggest that F-TCC has a shorter ulcer healing time compared with RCW among adults with diabetic NPFUs. Properly designed and conducted RCTs are still required for a stronger evidence base.

Pressure relieving interventions for the management of diabetes-related foot ulcers: a study from the Northern Territory of Australia

BACKGROUND

Offloading intervention is an important component in the management of diabetes-related foot ulcer (DFU). The NT population is unique with certain distinctive challenges. Potential advantages of and barriers to optimal offloading methods in our setting were investigated.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with DFU treated with offloading devices between 2003 and 2015 at the Multidisciplinary Foot Clinic (MDFC), Royal Darwin Hospital were included. The outcome measures were healing, amputation and discontinuation. Risk factors for offloading failure were studied.

RESULTS

Total contact cast (TCC) was the most common offloading used (n = 175). The other removable non-TCC devices used were therapeutic footwear (n = 74), CamWalker (n = 35), and orthotic devices (n = 43). The overall healing rate was 88.7%. Healing rates were higher (93.2% versus 83.5%, P < 0.05) and amputation rates were lower (4.0% versus 7.3%, P = 0.026) in the TCC group than in the removable non-TCC group. The mean duration of offloading was longer in the TCC group (3.6 ± 1.5 versus. 3.2 ± 1.5 months, P = 0.008). Wagner grade ≥ 2 and removable non-TCC devices were significant risk factors for offloading failure.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with TCC had higher healing rates than those treated with removable non-TCC devices. The duration of offloading was longer than reported in other studies. Higher Wagner grade and removable non-TCC devices were risk factors for offloading failure. Non-removable offloading devices are the first choice in diabetes-related neuropathic ulcers.

Knee-High Devices Are Gold in Closing the Foot Ulcer Gap: A Review of Offloading Treatments to Heal Diabetic Foot Ulcers

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) are a leading cause of the global disease burden. Most DFUs are caused, and prolonged, by high plantar tissue stress under the insensate foot of a person with peripheral neuropathy. Multiple different offloading treatments have been used to try to reduce high plantar tissue stress and heal DFUs, including bedrest, casting, offloading devices, footwear, and surgical procedures. The best offloading treatments are those that balance the benefits of maximizing reductions in high plantar tissue stress, whilst reducing the risks of poor satisfaction, high costs and potential adverse events outcomes. This review aimed to summarize the best available evidence on the effects of offloading treatments to heal people with DFUs, plus review their use in clinical practice, the common barriers and solutions to using these treatments, and discuss promising emerging solutions that may improve offloading treatments in future. Findings demonstrate that knee-high offloading devices, non-removable or removable knee-high devices worn for all weight-bearing activities, are the gold standard offloading treatments to heal most patients with DFU, as they are much more effective, and typically safer, quicker, and cheaper to use compared with other offloading treatments. The effectiveness of offloading treatments also seems to increase when increased offloading mechanical features are incorporated within treatments, including customized insoles, rocker-bottom soles, controlled ankle motion, and higher cast walls. However, in clinical practice these gold standard knee-high offloading devices have low rates of prescription by clinicians and low rates of acceptance or adherence by patients. The common barriers resulting in this low use seem to surround historical misperceptions that are mostly dispelled by contemporary evidence. Further, research is now urgently required to close the implementation gap between the high-quality of supporting evidence and the low use of knee-high devices in clinical practice to reduce the high global disease burden of DFU in future.

Is TCC-EZ a Suitable Alternative to Gold Standard Total-Contact Casting?

BACKGROUND

The total-contact cast (TCC) is the gold standard for off-loading diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) given its nonremovable nature. However, this modality remains underused in clinical settings due to the time and experience required for appropriate application. The TCC-EZ is an alternative off-loading modality marketed as being nonremovable and having faster and easier application. This study aims to investigate the potential of the TCC-EZ to reduce foot plantar pressures.

METHODS

Twelve healthy participants (six males, six females) were fitted with a removable cast walker, TCC, TCC-EZ, and TCC-EZ with accompanying brace removed. These off-loading modalities were tested against a control. Pedar-X technology measured peak plantar pressures in each condition. Statistical analysis of four regions of the foot (rearfoot, midfoot, forefoot, and hallux) was conducted with Friedman and Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Significance was set at P < .05.

RESULTS

All of the off-loading conditions significantly reduced pressure compared with the control, except the TCC-EZ without the brace in the hallux region. There was no statistically significant difference between TCC-EZ and TCC peak pressure in any foot region. The TCC-EZ without the brace obtained significantly higher peak pressures than with the brace. The removable cast walker produced similar peak pressure reduction in the midfoot and forefoot but significantly higher peak pressures in the rearfoot and hallux.

CONCLUSIONS

The TCC-EZ is a viable alternative to the TCC. However, removal of the TCC-EZ brace results in minimal plantar pressure reduction, which might limit clinical applications of the TCC-EZ.

3D scaffolds in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: New trends vs conventional approaches

Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a serious complication of diabetes mellitus, affecting roughly 25% of diabetic patients and resulting in lower limb amputation in over 70% of known cases. In addition to the devastating physiological consequences of DFU and its impact on patient quality of life, DFU has significant clinical and economic implications. Various traditional therapies are implemented to effectively treat DFU. However, emerging technologies such as bioprinting and electrospinning, present an exciting opportunity to improve current treatment strategies through the development of 3D scaffolds, by overcoming the limitations of current wound healing strategies. This review provides a summary on (i) current prevention and treatment strategies available for DFU; (ii) methods of fabrication of 3D scaffolds relevant for this condition; (iii) suitable materials and commonly used molecules for the treatment of DFU; and (iv) future directions offered by emerging technologies.

Diabetic foot ulcers: Epidemiology and the role of multidisciplinary care teams

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are a common but highly morbid complication of long-standing diabetes, carrying high rates of associated major amputation and mortality. As the global incidence of diabetes has increased, along with the lifespan of the diabetic patient, the worldwide burden of DFUs has grown steadily. Outcomes in diabetes and DFUs are known to depend strongly on social determinants of health, with worse outcomes noted in minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. Effective treatment of DFUs is complex, requiring considerable expenditure of resources and significant cost to the health care system. Comprehensive care models with multidisciplinary teams have proven effective in the treatment of DFUs by decreasing barriers to care and increasing access to the multiple specialists required to provide timely and effective DFU procedural intervention, surveillance, and preventative care. Vascular surgeons are an integral part throughout the cycle of care for DFUs and should be involved early in the course of such patients to maximize their contributions to a multidisciplinary care model.

Clinical insights into Charcot foot

Charcot neuropathic arthropathy (CN) is a devastating condition resulting in non-reducible foot deformity that places patients with distal peripheral neuropathy at risk for the development of chronic neuropathic foot ulcers, major lower extremity amputation, and even death. The condition is often misdiagnosed early in its presentation because of a lack of knowledge among members of the medical community. Consequently, initial therapies for the condition are fewer and patients who present in more advanced stages of the condition are more difficult to manage. We now understand that CN is a multifactorial process resulting in unregulated osteoclastogenesis and bony destruction. Classically, the patient will present with an edematous, erythematous foot with increased temperature. These non-specific findings lead to a multitude of differential diagnoses. However, there are no diagnostic biomarkers or pathognomonic clinical signs to distinguish this condition from other common foot ailments seen in the context of peripheral neuropathy. Advancing our understanding of this condition, while educating the medical community about its devastating impact, is needed to advance and improve outcomes for patients affected by CN.

Guidelines on multidisciplinary approaches for the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease (2020 edition)

In recent years, as living standards have continued to improve, the number of diabetes patients in China, along with the incidence of complications associated with the disease, has been increasing. Among these complications, diabetic foot disease is one of the main causes of disability and death in diabetic patients. Due to the differences in economy, culture, religion and level of medical care available across different regions, preventive and treatment methods and curative results for diabetic foot vary greatly. In multidisciplinary models built around diabetic foot, the timely assessment and diagnosis of wounds and appropriate methods of prevention and treatment with internal and external surgery are key to clinical practice for this pathology. In 2019, under the leadership of the Jiangsu Medical Association and Chinese Diabetes Society, the writing group for the Guidelines on multidisciplinary approaches for the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease (2020 edition) was established with the participation of scholars from the specialist areas of endocrinology, burn injury, vascular surgery, orthopedics, foot and ankle surgery and cardiology. Drawing lessons from diabetic foot guidelines from other countries, this guide analyses clinical practices for diabetic foot, queries the theoretical basis and grades and gives recommendations based on the characteristics of the pathology in China. This paper begins with assessments and diagnoses of diabetic foot, then describes treatments for diabetic foot in detail, and ends with protections for high-risk feet and the prevention of ulcers. This manuscript covers the disciplines of internal medicine, surgical, nursing and rehabilitation and describes a total of 50 recommendations that we hope will provide procedures and protocols for clinicians dealing with diabetic foot.

Registry number: IPGRP-2020cn124

Mini Invasive Floating Metatarsal Osteotomy for Diabetic Foot Ulcers Under the First Metatarsal Head: A Case Series

Diabetic foot ulcers under the first metatarsal head are difficult to treat and prevent recurrence. The aim of this study is to summarize the results of a distal first metatarsal minimally invasive floating osteotomy for ulcers under the first metatarsal head in patients with diabetic neuropathy. We reviewed files of patients with diabetic neuropathy undergoing a floating first metatarsal osteotomy. Demographic and clinical data were collected and analyzed to determine success and complications. We found records for 21 patients (mean age 64) with University of Texas 1A ulcers. The ulcer's mean age was 11.2 months. Following surgery, the ulcer completely resolved after a mean of 3.7 (2 to 11) weeks in 19 patients. During the first year, there were 4 complications related to the surgery (including 3 infections). At latest follow-up, 17/21 (81%) patients had healed with satisfactory results. Minimal invasive floating distal osteotomy of the first metatarsal can cure and prevent recurrence of diabetic foot ulcers under the first metatarsal head in 80% of the patients, but the ability to provide close follow-up and prompt response are prerequisites.

Effectiveness of offloading interventions to heal foot ulcers in persons with diabetes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Offloading interventions are commonly used in clinical practice to heal foot ulcers. The aim of this updated systematic review is to investigate the effectiveness of offloading interventions to heal diabetic foot ulcers.

METHODS

We updated our previous systematic review search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to also include original studies published between July 29, 2014 and August 13, 2018 relating to four offloading intervention categories in populations with diabetic foot ulcers: (a) offloading devices, (b) footwear, (c) other offloading techniques, and (d) surgical offloading techniques. Outcomes included ulcer healing, plantar pressure, ambulatory activity, adherence, adverse events, patient-reported measures, and cost-effectiveness. Included controlled studies were assessed for methodological quality and had key data extracted into evidence and risk of bias tables. Included non-controlled studies were summarised on a narrative basis.

RESULTS

We identified 41 studies from our updated search for a total of 165 included studies. Six included studies were meta-analyses, 26 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 13 other controlled studies, and 120 non-controlled studies. Five meta-analyses and 12 RCTs provided high-quality evidence for non-removable knee-high offloading devices being more effective than removable offloading devices and therapeutic footwear for healing plantar forefoot and midfoot ulcers. Total contact casts (TCCs) and non-removable knee-high walkers were shown to be equally effective. Moderate-quality evidence exists for removable knee-high and ankle-high offloading devices being equally effective in healing, but knee-high devices have a larger effect on reducing plantar pressure and ambulatory activity. Low-quality evidence exists for the use of felted foam and surgical offloading to promote healing of plantar forefoot and midfoot ulcers. Very limited evidence exists for the efficacy of any offloading intervention for healing plantar heel ulcers, non-plantar ulcers, and neuropathic ulcers with infection or ischemia.

CONCLUSION

Strong evidence supports the use of non-removable knee-high offloading devices (either TCC or non-removable walker) as the first-choice offloading intervention for healing plantar neuropathic forefoot and midfoot ulcers. Removable offloading devices, either knee-high or ankle-high, are preferred as second choice over other offloading interventions. The evidence bases to support any other offloading intervention is still weak and more high-quality controlled studies are needed in these areas.

The impact of diabetic foot ulcers and unilateral offloading footwear on gait in people with diabetes

BACKGROUND

Unilateral offloading footwear prescribed to patients with diabetic foot ulcers elevates one limb relative to the other, which may lead to limp and abnormal gait. This study investigated whether the unilateral foot ulcer and offloading combination negatively impacts gait function beyond diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

METHODS

Eighty-six participants were recruited in 3 groups: 12 with diabetic peripheral neuropathy and unilateral foot ulcers wearing offloading footwear (offloading group, age = 55.6 ± 9.5 years, BMI = 30.9 ± 4.5 kg/m2), 27 with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (neuropathy group, age = 64.3 ± 7.7 years, BMI = 30.9 ± 5.4 kg/m2), and 47 non-diabetic controls (non-diabetic group, age = 62.9 ± 16.1 years, BMI = 29.0 ± 6.0 kg/m2). Gait function was quantified during a habitual speed walking test using a validated wearable platform.

FINDINGS

The offloading group exhibited deteriorated gait function compared to the non-diabetic group (p < 0.005, Cohen's effect size d = 0.90-2.61). They also had decreased gait speed (p < 0.001, d = 1.79) and stride length (p < 0.001, d = 1.76), as well as increased gait cycle time (p < 0.001, d = 1.67) and limp (p < 0.050, d = 0.72-1.49) compared to the neuropathy group. The offloading group showed increased gait unsteadiness compared to the neuropathy group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance in our samples.

INTERPRETATION

This study demonstrated that while diabetic peripheral neuropathy deteriorates gait function, including increasing gait unsteadiness and limp, the diabetic foot ulcer and offloading combination magnifies the deterioration beyond diabetic peripheral neuropathy. These findings promote caution of the current standards of care for treating diabetic foot ulcers with offloading footwear. However, it is possible that a contralateral shoe lift may remedy deteriorated gait function and improve quality of life for unilateral offloading users.

Guidelines on offloading foot ulcers in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update)

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease since 1999. This guideline is on the use of offloading interventions to promote the healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes and updates the previous IWGDF guideline. We followed the GRADE methodology to devise clinical questions and critically important outcomes in the PICO format, to conduct a systematic review of the medical-scientific literature, and to write recommendations and their rationale. The recommendations are based on the quality of evidence found in the systematic review, expert opinion where evidence was not available, and a weighing of the benefits and harms, patient preferences, feasibility and applicability, and costs related to the intervention. For healing a neuropathic plantar forefoot or midfoot ulcer in a person with diabetes, we recommend that a nonremovable knee-high offloading device is the first choice of offloading treatment. A removable knee-high and removable ankle-high offloading device are to be considered as the second- and third-choice offloading treatment, respectively, if contraindications or patient intolerance to nonremovable offloading exist. Appropriately, fitting footwear combined with felted foam can be considered as the fourth-choice offloading treatment. If non-surgical offloading fails, we recommend to consider surgical offloading interventions for healing metatarsal head and digital ulcers. We have added new recommendations for the use of offloading treatment for healing ulcers that are complicated with infection or ischaemia and for healing plantar heel ulcers. Offloading is arguably the most important of multiple interventions needed to heal a neuropathic plantar foot ulcer in a person with diabetes. Following these recommendations will help health care professionals and teams provide better care for diabetic patients who have a foot ulcer and are at risk for infection, hospitalization, and amputation.

Differences between national and international guidelines for the management of diabetic foot disease

AIM

No studies have investigated if national guidelines to manage diabetic foot disease differ from international guidelines. This study aimed to compare guidelines of Western Pacific nations with the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) guidance documents.

METHODS

The 77 recommendations in five chapters of the 2015 IWGDF guidance documents were used as the international gold standard reference. The IWGDF national representative(s) from 12 Western Pacific nations were invited to submit their nation's diabetic foot guideline(s). Four investigators rated information in the national guidelines as "similar," "partially similar," "not similar," or "different" when compared with IWGDF recommendations. National representative(s) reviewed findings. Disagreements in ratings were discussed until consensus agreement achieved.

RESULTS

Eight of 12 nations (67%) responded: Australia, China, New Zealand, Taiwan, and Thailand provided national guidelines; Singapore provided the Association of Southeast Asian Nations guidelines; and Hong Kong and the Philippines advised no formal national diabetic foot guidelines existed. The six national guidelines included were 39% similar/partially similar, 58% not similar, and 2% different compared with the IWGDF recommendations. Within individual IWGDF chapters, the six national guidelines were similar/partially similar with 53% of recommendations for the IWGDF prevention chapter, 42% for wound healing, 40% for infection, 40% for peripheral artery disease, and 20% for offloading.

CONCLUSIONS

National diabetic foot disease guidelines from a large and diverse region of the world showed limited similarity to recommendations made by international guidelines. Differences between recommendations may contribute to differences in national diabetic foot disease outcomes and burdens.

The Superiority of Removable Contact Splints in the Healing of Diabetic Foot during Postoperative Care

OBJECTIVE

Off-loading is one of the crucial components of diabetic foot (DF) therapy. However, there remains a paucity of studies on the most suitable off-loading for DF patients under postoperative care. The aim of our study was to evaluate the effect of different protective off-loading devices on healing and postoperative complications in DF patients following limb preservation surgery.

METHODS

This observational study comprised 127 DF patients. All enrolled patients had undergone foot surgery and were off-loaded empirically as follows: wheelchair+removable contact splint (RCS) (group R: 29.2%), wheelchair only (group W: 48%), and wheelchair+removable prefabricated device (group WP: 22.8%). We compared the primary (e.g., the number of healed patients, healing time, and duration of antibiotic (ATB) therapy) and secondary outcomes (e.g., number of reamputations and number and duration of rehospitalizations) with regard to the operation regions across all study groups.

RESULTS

The lowest number of postoperative complications (number of reamputations: p = 0.028; rehospitalizations: p = 0.0085; and major amputations: p = 0.02) was in group R compared to groups W and WP. There was a strong trend toward a higher percentage of healed patients (78.4% vs. 55.7% and 65.5%; p = 0.068) over a shorter duration (13.7 vs. 16.5 and 20.3 weeks; p = 0.055) in the R group, as well. Furthermore, our subanalysis revealed better primary outcomes in patients operated in the midfoot and better secondary outcomes in patients after forefoot surgery-odds ratios favouring the R group included healing at 2.5 (95% CI, 1.04-6.15; p = 0.037), reamputations at 0.32 (95% CI, 0.12-0.84; p = 0.018), and rehospitalizations at 0.22 (95% CI, 0.08-0.58; p = 0.0013).

CONCLUSIONS

This observational study suggests that removable contact splint combined with a wheelchair is better than a wheelchair with or without removable off-loading device for accelerating wound healing after surgical procedures; it also minimises overall postoperative complications, reducing the number of reamputations by up to 77% and the number of rehospitalizations by up to 66%.

Current concepts for the evaluation and management of diabetic foot ulcers

The lifetime risk for diabetic patients to develop a diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is 25%. In these patients, the risk of amputation is increased and the outcome deteriorates.More than 50% of non-traumatic lower-extremity amputations are related to DFU infections and 85% of all lower-extremity amputations in patients with diabetes are preceded by an ulcer; up to 70% of diabetic patients with a DFU-related amputation die within five years of their amputation.Optimal management of patients with DFUs must include clinical awareness, adequate blood glucose control, periodic foot inspection, custom therapeutic footwear, off-loading in high-risk patients, local wound care, diagnosis and control of osteomyelitis and ischaemia. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3:513-525. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.180010.

Effect of different casting design characteristics on offloading the diabetic foot

BACKGROUND

Non-removable knee-high devices, such as a total contact cast (TCC), are recommended for offloading diabetic plantar forefoot ulcers. However, it is insufficiently known how each of the different design characteristics of these devices contribute to offloading the diabetic foot.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the offloading effect of the different design characteristics that make up a non-removable knee-high cast for people with diabetes and active or previous plantar forefoot ulcers?

METHODS

Sixteen persons with diabetes, peripheral neuropathy and a healed or active plantar forefoot ulcer had their plantar pressures measured during walking in a non-removable knee-high device (TCC), in that device made removable (BTCC), in that device made below-ankle (cast shoe), in that cast shoe worn with a different walking sole and in a newly made cast shoe without a custom-moulded foot-device interface. Peak pressures, force-time integral, and perceived walking comfort were assessed.

RESULTS

Compared with the BTCC, peak pressures in the TCC were 47% (P = 0.028), 26% (P = 0.003) and 15% (P = 0.050) lower at the hallux, midfoot and (previous) ulcer location, respectively. Compared to the cast shoe, peak pressures in the BTCC were 39-43% and 47% (both P < 0.001) lower in the forefoot regions and (previous) ulcer location, respectively. The total force-time integral was 21% and 11% (P < 0.007) lower in the TCC and BTCC compared to the cast shoe. Perceived walking comfort was 5.6 in the TCC and 6.5 in the BTCC (P = 0.037). Effects of the other design characteristics (i.e. walking sole and plantar moulding) were non-significant.

SIGNIFICANCE

The TCC gives superior offloading, mostly because of being a knee-high and non-removable device, providing an optimal 'shaft effect'. The TCC does, however, negatively affect walking comfort. These results aid decision-making in offloading diabetic plantar forefoot ulcers.

A Narrative Review of the Benefits and Risks of Total Contact Casts in the Management of Diabetic Foot Ulcers

Total contact casts are recognized as the gold standard treatment for neuropathic plantar diabetic foot ulceration, endorsed by all national and international consensus papers. Despite this, research has shown that there is a dichotomy between the existing evidence which supports the use of total contact casts in the management of diabetic foot ulcers and its use in clinical practice. This article aims to highlight the benefits, risks, and barriers associated with total contact cast use in the management of diabetic foot ulcers in the clinical setting, with an emphasis on existing research carried out in this field to encourage change in clinical practice and utilization of this effective treatment modality.

New trends in the orthopaedic management of diabetic foot

Although there are various types of therapeutic footwear currently used to treat diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs), recent literature has enforced the concept that total-contact casts are the benchmark.Besides conventional clinical tests and imaging modalities, advanced MRI techniques and high-sensitivity nuclear medicine modalities present several advantages for the investigation of diabetic foot problems.The currently accepted principles of DFU care are rigorous debridement followed by modern wound dressings to provide a moist wound environment. Recently, hyperbaric oxygen and negative pressure wound therapy have aroused increasing attention as an adjunctive treatment for patients with DFUs.For DFU, various surgical treatments are currently available, including resection arthroplasty, metatarsal osteotomies and metatarsal head resections.In the modern management of the Charcot foot, surgery in the acute phase remains controversial and under investigation. While conventional fixation techniques are frequently insufficient to keep alignment postoperatively, superconstruct techniques could provide a successful fixation.Retrograde intramedullary nailing has been a generally accepted method of achieving stability. The midfoot fusion bolt is a current treatment device that maintains the longitudinal columns of the foot. Also, Achilles tendon lengthening remains a popular method in the management of Charcot foot. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170073.

Accelerated healing of a diabetic foot ulcer using autologous stromal vascular fraction suspended in platelet-rich plasma

We describe the case of a Type I diabetic patient with a refractory foot ulcer that remained unhealed for 2 years despite conventional therapy. Autologous adipose-derived stromal vascular fraction suspended in autologous platelet-rich plasma was applied to the wound, which completely healed within 1 month. The wound remained closed with no complications for a 2-year follow-up. Reporting of this and similar cases may lead to larger clinical trials that will prove the efficacy of this therapy that may offer accelerated healing and lessen the financial burden of more expensive therapeutic modalities.

Surgical offloading procedures for diabetic foot ulcers compared to best non-surgical treatment: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Diabetic foot ulcers are frequently related to elevated pressure under a bony prominence. Conservative treatment includes offloading with orthopaedic shoes and custom made orthotics or plaster casts. While casting in plaster is usually effective in achieving primary closure of foot ulcers, recurrence rates are high. Minimally invasive surgical offloading that includes correction of foot deformities has good short and long term results. The surgery alleviates the pressure under the bony prominence, thus enabling prompt ulcer healing, negating the patient's dependence on expensive shoes and orthotics, with a lower chance of recurrence. The purpose of this protocol is to compare offloading surgery (percutaneous flexor tenotomy, mini-invasive floating metatarsal osteotomy or Keller arthroplasty) to non-surgical treatment for patients with diabetic foot ulcers in a semi-crossover designed RCT.

Methods

One hundred patients with diabetic neuropathy related foot ulcers (tip of toe ulcers, ulcers under metatarsal heads and ulcers under the hallux interphalangeal joint) will be randomized (2:3) to a surgical offloading procedure or best available non-surgical treatment. Group 1 (surgery) will have surgery within 1 week. Group 2 (controls) will be prescribed an offloading cast applied for up to 12 weeks (based on clinical considerations). Following successful offloading treatment (ulcer closure with complete epithelization) patients will be prescribed orthopaedic shoes and custom made orthotics. If offloading by cast for at least 6 weeks fails, or the ulcer recurs, patients will be offered surgical offloading. Follow-up will take place till 2 years following randomization. Outcome criteria will be time to healing of the primary ulcer (complete epithelization), time to healing of surgical wound, recurrence of ulcer, time to recurrence and complications.

Discussion

The high recurrence rate of foot ulcers and their dire consequences justify attempts to find better solutions than the non-surgical options available at present. To promote surgery, RCT level evidence of efficacy is necessary.

Trial registration

Israel MOH_2017-08-10_000719. NIH: NCT03414216.

Diabetic Foot Australia guideline on footwear for people with diabetes

Background

The aim of this paper was to create an updated Australian guideline on footwear for people with diabetes.

Methods

We reviewed new footwear publications, (inter)national guidelines, and consensus expert opinion alongside the 2013 Australian footwear guideline to formulate updated recommendations.

Result

We recommend health professionals managing people with diabetes should: (1) Advise people with diabetes to wear footwear that fits, protects and accommodates the shape of their feet. (2) Advise people with diabetes to always wear socks within their footwear, in order to reduce shear and friction. (3) Educate people with diabetes, their relatives and caregivers on the importance of wearing appropriate footwear to prevent foot ulceration. (4) Instruct people with diabetes at intermediate- or high-risk of foot ulceration to obtain footwear from an appropriately trained professional to ensure it fits, protects and accommodates the shape of their feet. (5) Motivate people with diabetes at intermediate- or high-risk of foot ulceration to wear their footwear at all times, both indoors and outdoors. (6) Motivate people with diabetes at intermediate- or high-risk of foot ulceration (or their relatives and caregivers) to check their footwear, each time before wearing, to ensure that there are no foreign objects in, or penetrating, the footwear; and check their feet, each time their footwear is removed, to ensure there are no signs of abnormal pressure, trauma or ulceration. (7) For people with a foot deformity or pre-ulcerative lesion, consider prescribing medical grade footwear, which may include custom-made in-shoe orthoses or insoles. (8) For people with a healed plantar foot ulcer, prescribe medical grade footwear with custom-made in-shoe orthoses or insoles with a demonstrated plantar pressure relieving effect at high-risk areas. (9) Review prescribed footwear every three months to ensure it still fits adequately, protects, and supports the foot. (10) For people with a plantar diabetic foot ulcer, footwear is not specifically recommended for treatment; prescribe appropriate offloading devices to heal these ulcers.

Conclusions

This guideline contains 10 key recommendations to guide health professionals in selecting the most appropriate footwear to meet the specific foot risk needs of an individual with diabetes.

Lower-extremity dynamics of walking in neuropathic diabetic patients who wear a forefoot-offloading shoe

BACKGROUND

A forefoot-offloading shoes has a negative-heel rocker outsole and is used to treat diabetic plantar forefoot ulcers, but its mechanisms of action and their association with offloading and gait stability are not sufficiently clear.

METHODS

Ten neuropathic diabetic patients were tested in a forefoot-offloading shoe and subsequently in a control shoe with no specific offloading construction, both worn on the right foot (control shoe on left), while walking at 1.2m/s. 3D-instrumented gait analysis and simultaneous in-shoe plantar pressure measurements were used to explain the shoe's offloading efficacy and to define centre-of-pressure profiles and left-to-right symmetry in ankle joint dynamics (0-1, 1:maximum symmetry), as indicators for gait stability.

FINDINGS

Compared to the control shoe, peak forefoot pressures, vertical ground reaction force, plantar flexion angle, and ankle joint moment, all in terminal stance, and the proximal-to-distal centre-of-pressure trajectory were significantly reduced in the forefoot-offloading shoe (P<0.01). Peak ankle joint power was 51% lower in the forefoot-offloading shoe compared to the control shoe: 1.61 (0.35) versus 3.30 (0.84) W/kg (mean (SD), P<0.001), and was significantly associated with forefoot peak pressure (R²=0.72, P<0.001). Left-to-right symmetry in the forefoot-offloading shoe was 0.39 for peak ankle joint power.

INTERPRETATION

By virtue to their negative-heel rocker-outsole design, forefoot-offloading shoes significantly alter a neuropathic diabetic patient's gait towards a reduced push-off power that explains the shoe's offloading efficacy. However, gait symmetry and stability are compromised, and may be factors in the low perceived walking discomfort and limited use of these shoes in clinical practice. Shoe modifications (e.g. less negative heel, a more cushioning insole) may resolve this trade-off between efficacy and usability.

Evidence based review of literature on detriments to healing of diabetic foot ulcers

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus places a substantial burden on society worldwide. Diabetic foot ulcers are a challenging problem for clinicians. Seven generally accepted detriments to healing of diabetic foot ulcers were identified: infection, glycaemic control, vascular supply, smoking, nutrition, deformity and offloading. The aim of this paper is to present a comprehensive evidence based review of the literature available on detriments to healing of diabetic foot ulcers.

METHOD

A research question was generated for each of the detriments to healing and a comprehensive review of the literature was performed using the Pubmed database in July 2014. All articles were assessed for relevancy and a level of evidence was assigned. An analysis of the total body of literature was used to assign a grade of recommendation to each detriment.

RESULTS

Grade A recommendation was assigned to offloading as there was good evidence supporting this intervention. Grade B recommendation was assigned to deformity as there was fair evidence consistent with the hypothesis. Infection and vascular supply had poor quality evidence supporting the research question and grade C recommendation was assigned. Grade I recommendation was assigned to glycaemic control, smoking and nutrition as there was insufficient and conflicting evidence available.

CONCLUSION

Our literature review revealed good evidence for some factors and insufficient literature on others. Further studies are needed to provide quality evidence regarding detriments to healing of diabetic ulcers.

The efficacy of removable devices to offload and heal neuropathic plantar forefoot ulcers in people with diabetes: a single-blinded multicentre randomised controlled trial

Non-removable offloading is the 'gold standard' treatment for neuropathic diabetic plantar forefoot ulcers. However, removable offloading is the common 'standard of care'. We compared three removable offloading devices for ulcer healing efficacy. In this multicentre, randomised controlled trial, 60 persons with neuropathic diabetic plantar forefoot ulcers were randomly assigned to wear a custom-made knee-high cast [BTCC (bivalved TCC)], custom-made ankle-high cast shoe or a prefabricated ankle-high forefoot-offloading shoe (FOS). Primary outcome was healing at 12 weeks. Dynamic plantar pressures, daily stride count and treatment adherence were assessed on a randomly selected subset (n = 35). According to intention-to-treat analysis, 58% of patients healed with BTCC [OR 0·77 (95% CI 0·41-1·45) versus FOS], 60% with cast shoe [OR 0·81 (95% CI 0·44-1·49) versus FOS] and 70% with FOS (P = 0·70). Mean ± SD peak pressure in kPa at the ulcer site was 81 ± 55 for BTCC, 176 ± 80 for cast shoe and 107 ± 52 for FOS (P = 0·005); stride count was 4150 ± 1626, 3514 ± 1380 and 4447 ± 3190, respectively (P = 0·71); percentage of 2-week intervals that patients wore the device <50% of time was 17·3%, 5·2% and 4·9%, respectively. Non-significant differences in healing efficacy between the three devices suggest that, when non-removable offloading is contraindicated or not available, each can be used for plantar forefoot ulcer offloading. Efficacy is lower than previously found for non-removable offloading maybe because suboptimal adherence and high stride count expose the patient to high repetitive stresses. These factors should be carefully considered in decision making regarding ulcer treatment.

Outcomes Achieved With Use of a Prefabricated Roll-On Total Contact Cast

BACKGROUND

The total contact cast (TCC) is considered the gold standard for offloading of plantar diabetic foot ulcerations, yet its use remains suboptimal for a variety of reasons. Prefabricated TCC systems have been developed to help enhance TCC use. The primary objective of this study was to determine if healing rates obtained with use of a prefabricated roll-on TCC were similar to those reported with conventional TCC use. Secondary outcomes measured were the incidence of iatrogenic ulceration, amputation, and recurrent ulceration, and patient tolerance of the device.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed on all patients in whom TCC was used for treatment of an ulceration at our institution from April 2013 to December 2016. Seventy patients (132 ulcerations) were identified.

RESULTS

An 85.6% healing rate was achieved. Five subjects (7.1%) sustained 11 iatrogenic ulcerations. All resolved with local treatment and continued casting. Thirteen subjects (18.6%) underwent amputation. No amputation occurred because of TCC application technique or use. Fifteen ulcerations (12 subjects, 17.1%) recurred. Greater than 70% resolved with re-initiation of TCC use. Forty-three subjects (61.4%) tolerated use of the prefabricated roll-on TCC.

CONCLUSION

Similar healing rates and reduced rates of iatrogenic ulceration, amputation, and recurrent ulceration were attained with use of a prefabricated roll-on TCC. These results, good patient tolerance, and the reduced administrative and clinical time related to supply acquisition, training, and proper application supports use of this device as a viable alternative to a conventional TCC for treatment of plantar neuropathic foot ulcerations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.

The Role of Pressure Offloading on Diabetic Foot Ulcer Healing and Prevention of Recurrence

BACKGROUND

An increased plantar pressure is a causative factor in the development of plantar foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus, and ulcers are a precursor of lower extremity amputation.

METHODS

In this article, the evidence is reviewed that relieving areas of increased plantar pressure (ie, offloading) can heal plantar foot ulcers and prevent their recurrence.

RESULTS

Noninfected, nonischemic neuropathic plantar forefoot ulcers should heal in 6 to 8 weeks with adequate offloading. Recent meta-analyses and systematic reviews show that nonremovable knee-high devices are most effective. This is probably because they eliminate the problem of nonadherence with the use of a removable device. Studies show a large discrepancy between evidence-based recommendations on offloading and what is used in clinical practice. Many clinics continue to use methods that are less effective or have not been proven to be effective, while ignoring evidence-based methods. Strategies are proposed to address this issue, notably the adoption and implementation of recent international guidelines by professional societies and a stronger focus of clinicians on expedited healing. For the prevention of plantar foot ulcer recurrence in high-risk patients, 2 recent trials have shown that the incidence of recurrence can be significantly reduced with custom-made footwear that has a demonstrated pressure-relieving effect through guidance by plantar pressure measurements, under the condition that the footwear is worn.

CONCLUSION

This review helps to inform clinicians about effective offloading treatment for healing plantar foot ulcers and preventing their recurrence.

Evaluating Iatrogenic Complications of the Total-Contact Cast: An 8-Year Retrospective Review at Cleveland Clinic

BACKGROUND

Total-contact casting is an effective method to treat various pathologic abnormalities in patients with diabetic neuropathy, but its use is frequently associated with iatrogenic complications.

METHODS

The largest retrospective review to date of iatrogenic complications of total-contact casts was conducted over an 8-year period at Cleveland Clinic.

RESULTS

In the past 8 years, 23% of patients developed complications, and the most common complication was a new heel ulcer formation. Of these complications, 92.1% resolved, 6.4% were lost to follow-up, and 1.4% resulted in a partial foot amputation. Mean cast duration was 10.3 days for patients who developed a total-contact cast iatrogenic complication. The most common indication for the use of a total-contact cast was a neuropathic foot ulceration.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study support the use of total-contact casting in the insensate patient with diabetes. However, adequate staff training in total-contact cast application is recommended to reduce complications.

Lacking the 'protective label' of diabetes: Phenytoin-induced distal symmetrical peripheral neuropathy. A clinical case report

This report documents an unusual case of distal symmetrical peripheral neuropathy (DSPN) in an otherwise healthy patient without diabetes mellitus (DM) presenting to a podiatric wound care clinic. The development of gas gangrene coupled with Charcot neuroarthropathic changes ultimately resulted in a potentially life-saving transmetatarsal (TMT) amputation. Causation of, or at least a contributor to, the DSPN was likely phenytoin usage for epileptic seizures. Long-term use of phenytoin can lead to axonal shrinkage and random clusters of nerve demyelination [1]. Clinical standards for DM-induced DSPN indicate that annual comprehensive neurological assessment to detect nerve function deterioration is warranted [2]. This can aid in identifying patients at high risk of diabetic foot ulceration. However, oftentimes, patients exhibiting medication-induced neuropathy are not assessed to determine severity of the neuropathy nor are they educated about ulcer prevention in the same manner as patients with DM. This report advocates for a standardized threshold of diagnostic and preventative investigation for neuropathy of all aetiologies; diabetic, traumatic, viral, medication-induced and idiopathic.

Comparison of Removable and Irremovable Walking Boot to Total Contact Casting in Offloading the Neuropathic Diabetic Foot Ulceration

BACKGROUND

Despite its efficacy in healing neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs), total contact cast (TCC) is often underused because of technical limitations and poor patient acceptance. We compared TCC to irremovable and removable commercially available walking boots for DFU offloading.

METHODS

We prospectively studied 60 patients with DFUs, randomly assigned to 3 different offloading modalities: TCC (group A), walking boot rendered irremovable (i-RWD; group B), and removable walking boot (RWD; group C). Patients were followed up weekly for 90 days or up to complete re-epithelization; ulcer survival, healing time, and ulcer size reduction (USR) were considered for efficacy, whereas number of adverse events was considered for safety. Patients' acceptance and costs were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Mean healing time in the 3 groups did not differ (P = .5579), and survival analysis showed no difference between the groups (logrank test P = .8270). USR from baseline to the end of follow-up was significant (P < .01) in all groups without differences between the groups. Seven patients in group A (35%), 2 in group B (10%), and 1 in group C (5%) (Fisher exact test P = .0436 group A vs group C) reported nonsevere adverse events. Patients' acceptance and costs were significantly better in group C (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that a walking boot was as effective and safe as TCC in offloading the neuropathic DFUs, irrespective of removability. The better acceptability and lesser costs of a removable device may actually extend the possibilities of providing adequate offloading.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, prospective comparative study.

Total contact cast wall load in patients with a plantar forefoot ulcer and diabetes

BACKGROUND

The total contact cast (TCC) is an effective intervention to reduce plantar pressure in patients with diabetes and a plantar forefoot ulcer. The walls of the TCC have been indirectly shown to bear approximately 30 % of the plantar load. A new direct method to measure inside the TCC walls with capacitance sensors has shown that the anterodistal and posterolateral-distal regions of the lower leg bear the highest load. The objective of this study was to directly measure these two regions in patients with Diabetes and a plantar forefoot ulcer to further understand the mechanism of pressure reduction in the TCC.

METHODS

A TCC was applied to 17 patients with Diabetes and a plantar forefoot ulcer. TCC wall load (contact area, peak pressure and max force) at the anterodistal and posterolateral-distal regions of the lower leg were evaluated with two capacitance sensor strips measuring 90 cm(2) (pliance®, novel GmbH, Germany). Plantar load (contact area, peak pressure and max force) was measured with a capacitance sensor insole (pedar®, novel GmbH, Germany) placed inside the TCC. Both pedar® and pliance® collected data simultaneously at a sampling rate of 50Hz synchronised to heel strike. The magnitude of TCC wall load as a proportion of plantar load was calculated. The TCC walls were then removed to determine the differences in plantar loading between the TCC and the cut down shoe-cast for the whole foot, rearfoot, midfoot and forefoot (region of interest).

RESULTS

TCC wall load was substantial. The anterodistal lower leg recorded 48 % and the posterolateral-distal lower leg recorded 34 % of plantar contact area. The anterodistal lower leg recorded 28 % and the posterolateral-distal lower leg recorded 12 % of plantar peak pressure. The anterodistal lower leg recorded 12 % and the posterolateral-distal lower leg recorded 4 % of plantar max force. There were significant differences in plantar load between the TCC and the cut down shoe-cast for the whole foot, rearfoot, midfoot and forefoot (region of ulcer). Contact area significantly increased by 5 % beneath the whole foot, 8 % at the midfoot and 6 % at the forefoot in the shoe-cast (p < 0.05). Peak pressure significantly increased by 8 % beneath the midfoot and 13 % at the forefoot in the shoe-cast (p < 0.05). Max force significantly increased 6 % beneath the midfoot in the (shoe-cast p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In patients with diabetes and a plantar forefoot ulcer, the walls of the TCC bear considerable load. Reduced plantar contact area in the TCC compared to the shoe-cast suggests that the foot is suspended by the considerable load bearing capacity of the walls of the TCC which contributes mechanically to the pressure reduction and redistribution properties of the TCC.

Footwear and offloading interventions to prevent and heal foot ulcers and reduce plantar pressure in patients with diabetes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Footwear and offloading techniques are commonly used in clinical practice for preventing and healing of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes. The goal of this systematic review is to assess the medical scientific literature on this topic to better inform clinical practice about effective treatment.

METHODS

We searched the medical scientific literature indexed in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane database for original research studies published since 1 May 2006 related to four groups of interventions: (1) casting; (2) footwear; (3) surgical offloading; and (4) other offloading interventions. Primary outcomes were ulcer prevention, ulcer healing, and pressure reduction. We reviewed both controlled and non-controlled studies. Controlled studies were assessed for methodological quality, and extracted key data was presented in evidence and risk of bias tables. Uncontrolled studies were assessed and summarized on a narrative basis. Outcomes are presented and discussed in conjunction with data from our previous systematic review covering the literature from before 1 May 2006.

RESULTS

We included two systematic reviews and meta-analyses, 32 randomized controlled trials, 15 other controlled studies, and another 127 non-controlled studies. Several randomized controlled trials with low risk of bias show the efficacy of therapeutic footwear that demonstrates to relief plantar pressure and is worn by the patient, in the prevention of plantar foot ulcer recurrence. Two meta-analyses show non-removable offloading to be more effective than removable offloading for healing plantar neuropathic forefoot ulcers. Due to the limited number of controlled studies, clear evidence on the efficacy of surgical offloading and felted foam is not yet available. Interestingly, surgical offloading seems more effective in preventing than in healing ulcers. A number of controlled and uncontrolled studies show that plantar pressure can be reduced by several conservative and surgical approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Sufficient evidence of good quality supports the use of non-removable offloading to heal plantar neuropathic forefoot ulcers and therapeutic footwear with demonstrated pressure relief that is worn by the patient to prevent plantar foot ulcer recurrence. The evidence base to support the use of other offloading interventions is still limited and of variable quality. The evidence for the use of interventions to prevent a first foot ulcer or heal ischemic, infected, non-plantar, or proximal foot ulcers is practically non-existent. High-quality controlled studies are needed in these areas.

What's new in wound treatment: a critical appraisal

With the growing demand for the specialized care of wounds, there is an ever expanding abundance of wound care modalities available. It is difficult to identify which products or devices enhance wound healing, and thus, a critical and continual look at new advances is necessary. The goal of any wound regimen should be to optimize wound healing by combining basic wound care modalities including debridement, off-loading, and infection control with the addition of advanced therapies when necessary. This review takes a closer look at current uses of negative pressure wound therapy, bioengineered alternative tissues, and amniotic membrane products. While robust literature may be lacking, current wound care advances are showing great promise in wound healing.