Effectiveness of fast-track pathway for diabetic foot ulcerations

Effectiveness of Sucrose Octasulfate Dressing in the Treatment of Neuro-Ischaemic Diabetic Foot Heel Ulcers: A Retrospective Single arm Study

The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the use of sucrose octasulfate impregnated dressing (TLC-NOSF [Technology Lipido-Colloid-Nano-OligoSaccharide Factor]) in the management of persons with neuro-ischaemic heel diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). Consecutive patients who referred for an active non-infected neuro-ischaemic heel DFU belonging to grade IC (superficial) or IIC (deep to tendons, muscle or capsule) according to Texas University Classification were included. All patients were managed by a pre-set limb salvage protocol in the respect of International guidelines and the TLC-NOSF dressing was used as primary and specific dressing. Patients were evaluated any 2 to 4 weeks until wound healing or different outcomes. Primary outcome was the rate of complete wound healing after 24 weeks of follow-up. The secondary outcomes assessed the healing time, the rate of wound regression, the re-ulceration in the case of complete healing and the safety. Thirty patients were included. The mean age was 67 ± 11 years, 17 (56.7%) were male, all of them were affected by type 2 diabetes with a mean duration of 18 ± 7 years. Twenty patients (66.7%) showed deep ulcers (grade 2 of Texas University Classification); the mean TcPO2 at the inclusion was 42 ± 7 mm Hg. Twenty-two patients (73.3%) healed by Week 24. The mean time of healing was 84 ± 32 days, 2 (6.7%) patients had ulcer relapse after healing, 28 (93.3%) had wound regression >50%, 2 (6.7%) had mild infection, 1 (3.3%) reported major amputation. No serious adverse events related to TLC-NOSF dressing or local reactions were reported. This current study showed the potential benefit of sucrose octasulfate for treating neuro-ischaemic heel DFUs in addition to the standard of care.

TLC-NOSF dressings as a first-line local treatment of chronic wounds: a systematic review of clinical evidence

OBJECTIVE

Several national and international guidelines recommend lipidocolloid technology with a nano-oligosaccharide factor (TLC-NOSF) dressings (UrgoStart dressing range, Laboratoires Urgo, France) for treating patients with chronic wounds. However, these dressings are still often reported as second-line options, potentially leading to loss of opportunity for patients and additional costs for payers. This review aimed to explore the reported wound healing and patient outcomes as well as the related costs when the dressings were used as first-line treatment in patients with different types of chronic wounds.

METHOD

A systematic review of the literature was conducted. Databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, and Google Scholar) were searched up to 1 February 2024, without any language or time period limitations. Studies were eligible if the evaluated dressings had been used as a first-line treatment for chronic wounds, that is, as an integral part of the standard of care (SoC) at the patient's first presentation and/or in recent wounds. The main evaluation criteria included: wound healing rate; time to reach wound closure; change in patients' quality of life (QoL); and associated costs. The quality of evidence of the included studies was appraised using well-recognised risk-of-bias tools suitable for different study designs. A narrative synthesis describes the findings in three sections depending on the type of comparison. This report followed the principles of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies published between 2017 and 2024 met the eligibility criteria. A comparative analysis between TLC-NOSF dressings and standard dressings, both of which were used as first-line treatment, was reported in nine studies. A comparative analysis between the use of TLC-NOSF dressings as first-line and second-line treatments was reported in eight studies, and five studies reported a systematic use of the TLC-NOSF dressing as first-line treatment without a control group. Overall, the included studies had a relatively low risk of bias for the respective types of evidence. Data of 10,191 patients of both sexes and different age groups with a total of 10,203 wounds (diabetic foot ulcers, leg ulcers, pressure injuries, and other types of chronic wounds) were included in the analysis: 7775 treated with the evaluated dressing and 2428 treated with a comparator dressing. The data suggested that using TLC-NOSF as a first-line treatment for chronic wounds consistently resulted in significantly higher healing rates, shorter healing times, and cost savings compared with standard dressings used under similar conditions. Real-life evidence confirmed the results obtained in clinical trials and economic models, within similar ranges, regardless of the settings involved or of the characteristics of the patients and wounds treated. The wound healing rates ranged around 70-80% by week 20/24 and time-to-heal was reported on average around seven weeks, with slightly longer times reported in wounds with a more severe prognosis. Furthermore, the dressings were shown to improve patient QoL, and were well tolerated and accepted, supporting a wider adoption approach.

CONCLUSION

The results of this review are aligned with the current guidelines recommending the use of TLC-NOSF dressings in the treatment of patients with chronic wounds. They support its wider implementation as a first-line treatment and as an integral part of SoC for these wounds in the daily practice of all centres involved in their management.

Identification, influencing factors and outcomes of time delays in the management pathway of diabetic foot: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the time delays in the management of diabetic foot and explore influencing factors of these delays and potential outcomes.

METHODS

The researchers searched several electronic databases (Pubmed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, WanFang, CBM and VIP) for English and Chinese studies that examined time delays in the management pathway of diabetic foot. Two authors independently screened and extracted data, and assessed the quality of the included studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Agency for Health Research and Quality checklist. Due to heterogeneity among the studies, descriptive analysis was performed.

RESULTS

The review included 28 articles, comprising 20 cohort studies and 8 cross-sectional studies, that met the inclusion criteria. Among these, 14 were deemed of high quality. The median times from symptom onset to primary health care or specialist care varied from 3 to 46.69 days. The median delay in referral by primary care specialists ranged from 7 to 31 days, and subsequent median times to definitive treatment ranged from 6.2 to 56 days. Multiple complex factors were found to contribute to these delays, including patient demographics (older age, lower education level and income level) and poor patient health-seeking behaviors (inaccurate self-treatment, incorrect recognition and interpretation of symptoms), inaccurate assessment or initial treatment by health primary professionals, complex referral pathways and clinical characteristics of diabetic foot (number of foot ulcers, Wagner grade scale, and hemoglobin A1c index). Negative outcomes associated with these delays included increased risk of major amputation and mortality, decreased wound healing rate, prolonged hospital stay, and increased hospital costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Time delays in the diabetic foot management pathway were both common and serious, contributing to negative health outcomes for patients with diabetic foot. Many complex factors related to patient's poor patient health-seeking behaviors, health system, and clinical characteristics of diabetic foot are responsible for these delays. Therefore, it is necessary to develop new strategies for standard referral practices and strengthen patient awareness of seeking care.

Hospital Readmission in Patients With Diabetic Foot Ulcers: Prevalence, Causes, and Outcomes

The aim of the current study was to evaluate the rate of readmission in patients affected by diabetes and foot ulcers (DFUs), and causes and outcomes of patients requiring a new hospitalization. The current study is a retrospective observational study including patients who have required hospitalization since January 2019 to September 2022 due to a DFU. Once patients were discharged, they were regularly followed as outpatients. Within 6 months of follow-up, the rate of hospital readmission for a diabetic foot problem was recorded. According to the readmission or not, patients were divided into 2 groups, readmitted and not readmitted patients, respectively. Hence, all patients were followed for 6 months more and outcomes of the 2 groups were analyzed and compared. Overall, 310 patients were included. The mean age was 68  ±  12 years, the majority of patients reported type 2 diabetes (>90%), and the mean diabetes duration was approximately 20 years. Sixty-eight (21.9%) patients were readmitted. The main reason for hospital readmission was the presence of critical limb ischemia (CLI) in the contralateral limb (6.1%), the recurrence of CLI in the previous treated limb (4.5%), and the onset of new infected DFU in the contralateral foot (4.5%). Readmitted patients reported lower rate of healing (51.5% vs 89.2%, P < .0001) and higher rate of major amputation (10.3% vs 4.5%, P  =  .2) in comparison to not readmitted patients. Critical limb ischemia resulted in the only independent predictor of hospital readmission. Hospital readmission is a frequent issue among patients with DFUs, and readmitted patients showed a lower chance of wound healing. Critical limb ischemia resulted in the main cause of new hospitalization.

The Elephant in the Room

Despite its increasing prevalence, severity, and mortality, Diabetic foot syndrome (DFS) still remains an unaddressed critical issue. The management of DFS is adequately performed only in few centers, and clinical outcomes vary, depending on the possibility of patients to access optimal standards of care. To focus on the critical aspects of the management of DFS in Italy with the purpose of suggesting arguments that might have a more general audience, to improve the quality of therapy and accessibility to optimal care, we have written this article.

Fast-Track Pathway: An Effective Way to Boost Diabetic Foot Care

Diabetes is a chronic disease that challenges global health issues in many aspects. Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is one of the most common causes of reduced quality of life and increased hospitalization, amputation, treatment costs, and mortality in patients. Improper patients' knowledge, unsatisfactory education and training of healthcare workers, and limited facilities are the major cause of delayed referral and downscale management in DFUs. The diabetic foot clinical pathway is pivotal in providing best practices based on the latest standards and patient preferences. In the diabetic foot clinical pathway provided by the Iran Ministry of Health, the common concepts and grading systems are well defined for diabetic foot specialists so that patients can be diagnosed correctly and referred properly. Based on clinical examination guidelines, patients with diabetes are classified into low-risk, moderate-risk, high-risk, and active diabetic foot ulcer groups. One of this Pathway's main objectives is to prevent the patient from getting the first ulcer, prevent frequent recurrence ulcers, and most importantly, prevent minor and major amputation.

Healico-a wound care assistant in your pocket

Non-optimal wound management and late referral to specialised units negatively impacts patient prognosis and quality of life, as well as healthcare costs. Healico is a new mobile application (app), created in the wound care field, in response to the challenges and difficulties encountered by health professionals (HPs) who deal with patients with wounds on a daily basis. This article aims to describe how this new app was developed, how it works, as well as the real-life clinical benefits and evidence supporting its use. The Healico App assists nurses, physicians and other HPs by: supporting a holistic approach to patient management; facilitating wound assessment and documentation, irrespective of where care is provided (primary, specialised or hospital services, in either public or private institutions); and supporting consistent and safe clinical practice, as well as reducing variation in care. It also provides a fast, fluid and secure communication channel, and effective coordination between HPs, supporting early interventions. The app has also been shown to improve therapeutic adherence of patients by promoting inclusive dialogue with them.

Validation of the Fast-Track Model: A Simple Tool to Assess the Severity of Diabetic Foot Ulcers

This study aimed to validate the association between the grades of severity of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) identified by the fast-tack model and specific outcomes. Three hundred and sixty-seven patients with new DFUs who were referred to a tertiary level diabetic foot service serving Rome, Italy, were included. The fast-track model identifies three levels of DFUs' severity: uncomplicated DFUs, including superficial wounds, not-infected wounds, and not-ischemic wounds; complicated DFUs, including ischemic wounds, infected wounds, and deep ulcers involving the muscles, tendons, or bones, and any kind of ulcers in patients on dialysis and/or with heart failure; and severely complicated DFUs, including abscesses, wet gangrene, necrotizing fasciitis, fever, or clinical signs of sepsis. Healing, minor and major amputation, hospitalization, and survival after 24 weeks of follow-up were considered. Among the included patients, 35 (9.6%) had uncomplicated DFUs, 210 (57.2%) had complicated DFUs, and 122 (33.2%) had severely complicated DFUs. The outcomes for patients with uncomplicated, complicated, and severely complicated DFUs were as follows, respectively: healing, 97.1%, 86.2%, and 69.8%; minor amputation, 2.9%, 20%, and 66.4%; major amputation, 0%, 2.9%, and 16.4%; hospitalization, 14.3%, 55.7%, and 89.3%; survival, 100%, 96.7%, and 89.3%. DFU severity was an independent predictor of healing, amputation, hospitalization, and survival. The current study shows an association between the grade of severity of DFUs identified by the fast-track model and the considered outcomes. The fast-track model may be a useful tool for assessing the severity and prognosis of DFUs.

Below-the-ankle arterial disease: a new marker of coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes and foot ulcers

AIM

The aim of the current study is to evaluate the association between below-the-ankle (BTA) arterial disease and coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs).

METHODS

The study group was composed of patients with an active neuro-ischaemic DFUs managed in a tertiary care diabetic foot clinic. All patients received a pre-set limb salvage protocol including lower limb revascularization. By a retrospective analysis of individual angiograms, patients were divided in two groups: below-the-ankle (BTA) and above-the-ankle (ATA) arterial disease groups. The rate of CAD at baseline assessment and the new events of acute myocardial ischaemia (AMI) during 1-year of follow-up were evaluated and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Two hundreds seventy-two (272) patients were included, 120 (44.1%) showed BTA arterial disease while 152 (55.9%) ATA arterial disease. The mean age was 68.9 ± 9.6 years, 198 (72.8%) were male, 246 (90.4%) had type 2 diabetes, the mean diabetes duration was 20.7 ± 11.6 years, the mean HbA1c was 7.8 ± 4.2% (62 ± 22 mmmol/mol). The whole population reported CAD in 172 cases (63.4%), and the rate in the BTA group was significantly higher than in ATA group, respectively, 90 (75.4%) vs 82 (54.1%), p < 0.0001. During the follow-up, BTA group had 5% of new cases of AMI in comparison to 1.3% in ATA group (p < 0.001). At the multivariate analysis BTA resulted an independent marker of CAD [OR 1.9 CI 9 5% (1.3-4.5) p = 0.0001].

CONCLUSION

The current study shows a significant association between BTA arterial disease and CAD. A close cardiovascular screen should be required in patients with DFUs.

Covid-19 lockdown showed a likely beneficial effect on diabetic foot ulcers

AIMS

During the Covid-19 epidemic, many countries imposed population lockdown. This study aimed to analyse diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) evolution of outpatients between the lockdown period and 1 month after its end.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective, observational, single-centre study without modification of care. All patients who followed up for a DFU in the study centre between 15 April 2020 and 11 May 2020 were included. The baseline assessment occurred 4 weeks after the beginning of lockdown and the follow-up visit 4-6 weeks after easing of lockdown. The primary analysis was based on the Site, Ischaemia, Neuropathy, Bacterial infection, Area, Depth (SINBAD) classification.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients were included, median 69.4 years, and 25 were followed-up at easing of lockdown. The median SINBAD score was 2 (interquartile range 1; 3) at inclusion and 1 (1; 2) at easing of lockdown, with a mean change of -0.32 (95% confidence interval -0.93; 0.29). Seventy-two percent of the population had a stable or improved score between the two visits. The proportion of patients using off-loading footwear was higher among those whose SINBAD score improved compared to those whose score worsened or remained stable (72%, 44% and 28%, respectively). Diabetes type was linked to DFU prognosis. Five patients (20%) were hospitalized during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Lockdown appears to have had a positive effect on DFU if patients remain under the care of their expert wound centre. We believe this effect is related to better compliance with offloading. The wide use of tele-medicine seems relevant for the follow-up of DFU.

Major limb amputation and mortality in patients with neuro-ischaemic lower extremity wounds managed in a tertiary hospital: Focus on the differences among patients with diabetes, peripheral arterial disease and both

A majority of lower extremities neuro‐ischaemic wounds (NIU) are related to: (a) only diabetes (DM); (b) only peripheral artery disease (PAD); (c) co‐existing diabetes and peripheral artery disease (DM‐PAD). This study aims to characterise the major clinical outcomes of forementioned three groups of lower extremity wound patients in Singapore. Patients hospitalised for lower extremity NIU between January 2014 and October 2017 in a tertiary hospital in Singapore were analysed. Patients' major limb amputation and mortality were assessed using Cox regression models. Cumulative survival and amputation‐free survival among the three classified groups were calculated using Kaplan‐Meier analysis. Compared with patients with only DM, those in the PAD group and the DM‐PAD group had higher risk of major limb amputation (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.47, 95% CI: 1.65‐3.70; adjusted hazard ratio: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.53‐2.65 respectively) and mortality (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.36, 95% CI: 1.57‐3.55; adjusted hazard ratio: 2.46, 95% CI: 1.86‐3.26 respectively). The 3‐year survival and amputation‐free survival were lowest in the DM‐PAD group (52.1% and 41.5% respectively), followed by the PAD group (53.3% and 44.6% respectively) and the DM group (74.2% and 68.5% respectively). Lower extremity NIU patients with PAD or DM‐PAD were found to have poorer clinical prognosis than those with DM only.

Advances in pharmacotherapy for diabetic foot osteomyelitis

Introduction: The diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is usually clinical. Its severity is related to the location and depth of the lesion, and the presence of necrosis or gangrene. The aetiology of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is usually polymicrobial, and DFO is often associated with chronic or recurring ulceration.Areas covered: We built on the  International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) guidelines on the management of diabetic foot infection, providing an outline of the current and new concepts in pharmacotherapy in DFO. We assess future strategies in both medical, surgical and combination management of DFO.Expert opinion: Surgical removal of infected bone is considered as the standard treatment, but a medical approach of certain selected situations has now proven efficacy in selected patients. The combination of new modalities in local antibiotic delivery may provide better long-term solutions and more lasting remission and avoid the disadvantages of prolonged systemic antibiotics.