Clinical Outcomes for Diabetic Foot Ulcers Treated with Clostridial Collagenase Ointment or with a Product Containing Silver

Effectiveness of interventions to enhance healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

It is critical that interventions used to enhance the healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes are backed by high-quality evidence and cost-effectiveness. In previous years, the systematic review accompanying guidelines published by the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot performed 4-yearly updates of previous searches, including trials of prospective, cross-sectional and case-control design.

AIMS

Due to a need to re-evaluate older studies against newer standards of reporting and assessment of risk of bias, we performed a whole new search from conception, but limiting studies to randomised control trials only.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For this systematic review, we searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases for published studies on randomised control trials of interventions to enhance healing of diabetes-related foot ulcers. We only included trials comparing interventions to standard of care. Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion and assessed relevant outcomes as well as methodological quality.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 22,250 articles, of which 262 were selected for full text review across 10 categories of interventions. Overall, the certainty of evidence for a majority of wound healing interventions was low or very low, with moderate evidence existing for two interventions (sucrose-octasulfate and leucocyte, platelet and fibrin patch) and low quality evidence for a further four (hyperbaric oxygen, topical oxygen, placental derived products and negative pressure wound therapy). The majority of interventions had insufficient evidence.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the evidence to support any other intervention to enhance wound healing is lacking and further high-quality randomised control trials are encouraged.

Guidelines on interventions to enhance healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes (IWGDF 2023 update)

AIMS

Principles of wound management, including debridement, wound bed preparation, and newer technologies involving alternation of wound physiology to facilitate healing, are of utmost importance when attempting to heal a chronic diabetes-related foot ulcer. However, the rising incidence and costs of diabetes-related foot ulcer management necessitate that interventions to enhance wound healing of chronic diabetes-related foot ulcers are supported by high-quality evidence of efficacy and cost effectiveness when used in conjunction with established aspects of gold-standard multidisciplinary care. This is the 2023 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) evidence-based guideline on wound healing interventions to promote healing of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes. It serves as an update of the 2019 IWGDF guideline.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We followed the GRADE approach by devising clinical questions and important outcomes in the Patient-Intervention-Control-Outcome (PICO) format, undertaking a systematic review, developing summary of judgements tables, and writing recommendations and rationale for each question. Each recommendation is based on the evidence found in the systematic review and, using the GRADE summary of judgement items, including desirable and undesirable effects, certainty of evidence, patient values, resources required, cost effectiveness, equity, feasibility, and acceptability, we formulated recommendations that were agreed by the authors and reviewed by independent experts and stakeholders.

RESULTS

From the results of the systematic review and evidence-to-decision making process, we were able to make 29 separate recommendations. We made a number of conditional supportive recommendations for the use of interventions to improve healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes. These include the use of sucrose octasulfate dressings, the use of negative pressure wound therapies for post-operative wounds, the use of placental-derived products, the use of the autologous leucocyte/platelet/fibrin patch, the use of topical oxygen therapy, and the use of hyperbaric oxygen. Although in all cases it was stressed that these should be used where best standard of care was not able to heal the wound alone and where resources were available for the interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

These wound healing recommendations should support improved outcomes for people with diabetes and ulcers of the foot, and we hope that widescale implementation will follow. However, although the certainty of much of the evidence on which to base the recommendations is improving, it remains poor overall. We encourage not more, but better quality trials including those with a health economic analysis, into this area.

Prospective Cohort Validation Study of a Novel Foot Offloading Device

Pressure offloading is often considered a crucial factor affecting healing after a foot injury. We have devised a novel foot offloading device (PopSole) which allows for immediate customization of the area where there is foot pain and allows for adjustable arch support and metatarsal pad height while maintaining patient stability. We hypothesize that pain and function outcomes will improve significantly after use of the device over a 1-month period. Ten participants with foot pain for longer than 6 months completed five validated outcome questionnaires during three visits (initial screening, at 2 weeks, and at 4 weeks). Devices were deflated in areas of pain specific for each patient. Validated patient reported outcomes measures showed significant improvement in pain and function from baseline to week two (r = 0.644, P < 0.05), (r = 0.43, P < 0.05), and (r = 0.552, P < 0.05), respectively, and the Foot & Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) showed improved ability in activities of daily living (r = 0.58, P < 0.05) and sports (r = 0.69, P < 0.05). All 10 patients reported pain relief during at least one visit and/or an ability to return to standing-based activities that they previously were unable to do. PopSole rapidly improved pain and function, with sustained relief through 4 weeks. Current studies are in progress to assess long-term durability of the device and potential modifications to be made before future randomized studies to assess pressure and gait assessment, shear forces, and diabetic foot ulcer mitigation.

Bromelain-based enzymatic debridement of chronic wounds: Results of a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Chronic wounds are estimated to affect over 6 million people annually in the United States with an estimated annual cost of $25 billion. Debridement represents a key step in their management and is considered a basic necessity to induce the functional process of tissue repair. However, there is an unmet need for an efficient rapid acting non-surgical debridement agent. Bromelain-based enzymatic debridement has been proven to provide an effective, selective and safe non-surgical debridement in deep burns. EscharEx (MediWound Ltd, Yavne, Israel), is a bromelain-based enzymatic debridement agent currently in development for chronic wounds. The aim of this study was to assess its safety and efficacy in chronic wounds. Seventy-three patients suffering from a lower extremity ulcer of diabetic/venous insufficiency/post-surgical/traumatic aetiology were enrolled in a multicentre, assessor blinded, randomized controlled trial. Patients were randomized to topical treatment by either EscharEx or its gel vehicle for up to 10 daily 4 hour applications, and then continued follow-up for up to 6 months. The EscharEx arm achieved a significantly higher incidence of complete debridement compared to the gel vehicle arm; 55 versus 29% (p = .047), thus meeting the primary endpoint of this study. The EscharEx and gel vehicle arms achieved similar reductions in wound area, non-viable tissue area and wound healing scores during the debridement period. There were no significant differences between the arms in the incidence of complete wound closure (41% in the EsxcharEx arm vs. 53% in the gel vehicle arm) and in the mean time to complete wound closure (70.0 ± 32.8 days in the EsxcharEx arm vs. 65.7 ± 38.4 days in gel vehicle arm). There were no significant safety issues and EscharEx demonstrated a favourable benefit to risk profile.

Update of Topical Interventions for Healing Diabetic Ulcers-A Systematic Review

There are a variety of dressings for wound healing. For this reason, research can assist in the choice and proper use of the intervention. This current view of the effectiveness of dressing on diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This study is a systematic review of clinical trials selected in 4 databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. Studies without language restriction, published between 2009 and 2020, were included. The search resulted in the identification of 5651 articles, of which 58 met all inclusion criteria. Among these, 2 biomaterials (D-acellular dermal matrix and keratinocyte) and phenytoin were highlighted for achieving healing rates of 100% and 95.82% ± 2.22%, respectively. The literature presents several alternatives with different actions, cure rates, reduction rates, and varied cost benefits. The growth in the use of biomaterials for the treatment of DFU can be seen in this study.

Effectiveness of interventions to enhance healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes: a systematic review

The management of diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) remains a challenge, and there is continuing uncertainty concerning optimal approaches to wound healing. The International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) working group on wound healing has previously published systematic reviews of the evidence in 2008, 2012 and 2016 to inform protocols for routine care and to highlight areas which should be considered for further study. The working group has now updated this review by considering papers on the interventions to improve the healing of DFU's published between June 2014 and August 2018. Methodological quality of selected studies was independently assessed by a minimum of two reviewers using the recently published 21-point questionnaire as recommended by IWGDF/European Wound Management Association, as well as the previously incorporated Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Of the 2275 papers identified, 97 were finally selected for grading following full text review. Overall, there has been an improvement in study design and a significant rise in the number of published studies. While previous systematic reviews did not find any evidence to justify the use of newer therapies, except for negative pressure wound therapy in post-surgical wounds, in this review we found additional evidence to support some interventions including a sucrose-octasulfate dressing, the combined leucocyte, fibrin and platelet patch as well as topical application of some placental membrane products, all when used in addition to usual best care. Nonetheless, the assessment and comparison of published trials remains difficult with marked clinical heterogeneity between studies: in patient selection, study duration, standard of usual care provision and the timing and description of the clinical endpoints.

Guidelines on use of interventions to enhance healing of chronic foot ulcers in 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. In conjunction with advice from internal and external reviewers and expert consultants in the field, this update is based on a systematic review of the literature centred on the following: the Population (P), Intervention (I), Comparator (C) and Outcomes (O) framework; the use of the SIGN guideline/Cochrane review system; and the 21 point scoring system advocated by IWGDF/EWMA. This has resulted in 13 recommendations. The recommendation on sharp debridement and the selection of dressings remain unchanged from the last recommendations published in 2016. The recommendation to consider negative pressure wound therapy in post-surgical wounds and the judicious use of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in certain non-healing ischaemic ulcers also remains unchanged. Recommendations against the use of growth factors, autologous platelet gels, bioengineered skin products, ozone, topical carbon dioxide, nitric oxide or interventions reporting improvement of ulcer healing through an alteration of the physical environment or through other systemic medical or nutritional means also remain. New recommendations include consideration of the use of sucrose-octasulfate impregnated dressings in difficult to heal neuro-ischaemic ulcers and consideration of the use of autologous combined leucocyte, platelet and fibrin patch in ulcers that are difficult to heal, in both cases when used in addition to best standard of care. A further new recommendation is the consideration of topical placental derived products when used in addition to best standard of care.