Improved healing of chronic diabetic foot wounds in a prospective randomised controlled multi-centre clinical trial with a microvascular tissue allograft

Healing of diabetic neuropathic foot ulcers receiving standard treatment in randomised controlled trials: A random effects meta-analysis

This meta-analysis aimed to systematically assess and synthesise healing rates within a 12- to 24-week treatment period among patients with diabetic foot ulcers receiving standard-of-care interventions in randomised controlled trials. This meta-analysis included 32 randomised controlled trials conducted between 1996 and 2023, with sample sizes ranging from 9 to 169 patients. A random-effects model was applied to estimate pooled healing and infection rates. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic, and publication bias was assessed using Egger's test. The results revealed a pooled healing rate of 33.15% with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 31.18%-35.11% and an average healing time of approximately 50.14 days (standard deviation: 31.10 days). The infection proportion was determined to be 17.4% (95% CI: 12.2%-22.5%). Subgroup analysis indicated marginally higher healing rates in the 'Saline Gauze' group compared to the 'Alginate' group, although the latter exhibited a reduced infection proportion. Sensitivity analysis affirmed the robustness of these findings whereas Egger's test suggested the presence of potential publication bias concerning the healing outcomes. The standard-of-care interventions for diabetic foot ulcers demonstrate limited effectiveness, with only about one-third of patients achieving wound closure. The significant heterogeneity and publication bias observed necessitate a cautious interpretation of these results. The findings highlight the need for advanced wound care strategies and personalised treatment plans to improve outcomes in diabetic foot ulcers management. Future research should focus on conducting high-quality, well-reported randomised controlled trials to better understand effective treatments for DFUs.

Effectiveness of most common adjuvant wound treatments (skin substitutes, negative pressure wound therapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, platelet-rich plasma/fibrin, and growth factors) for the management of hard-to-heal diabetic foot ulcers: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for the development of the Italian Guidelines for the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Syndrome

AIM

To assess the effects of several adjuvant therapies (AT) commonly used in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). The present meta-analysis was designed to support the development of the Italian Guidelines for the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Syndrome.

METHODS

A Medline and Embase search were performed up to May 20th, 2024 collecting all RCTs including diabetic patients or reporting subgroup analyses on diabetic patients with DFU comparing AT with placebo/standard of care (SoC), with a duration of at least 12 weeks. Prespecified endpoints were: ulcer healing (principal), time-to-healing, major and minor amputation, serious adverse events (SAE), and all-cause mortality. AT assessed were: growth factors (GF), Platelet-rich plasma and fibrin (PRP/F), skin substitutes (SS), negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT), and hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). Mantel-Haenzel Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (MH-OR, 95% CIs) were either calculated or extracted directly from the publications. Weighted mean differences and 95% CIs were calculated for continuous variables.

RESULTS

Fifty-one studies fulfilled all inclusion criteria (3, 5, 27, 8, and 8 with GF, PRP/F, SS, NPWT, and HBOT, respectively). Participants treated with any of the explored AT had a significantly higher ulcer healing rate (MH-OR ranging from 2.17 to 4.18) and shorter time-to-healing in comparison with SoC/placebo. Only PRP/F and HBOT showed a significantly lower risk of major amputation (MH-OR: 0.32(0.11;0,93; p = 0.04 and 0.28(0.10;0,79; p = 0.02, respectively), despite a higher risk of SAE. No other significant effects on the above-reported prespecified endpoints were observed. For the primary endpoint, the quality of evidence was rated as "high" for all the AT, except for NPWT ("moderate").

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, AT can actively promote wound healing and shorten time-to-healing in patients with DFU. HBOT and PRP/F also showed a reduction of the risk of major amputation, despite a higher rate of SAE.

A Prospective, Open-Label, Randomized, Comparative, Investigator-Initiated Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of Autologous Growth Factor Concentrate Using the Healrex Therapy Kit With Standard Wound Care in Lower-Extremity Diabetic Ulcer

Background and objectives The persistent nature of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) is mainly attributable to compromised wound healing mechanisms, which are aggravated due to poor blood flow, neuropathy, and infection. Growth factors have become essential agents in the treatment of DFUs, serving as primary mediators that enhance wound healing through the stimulation of cell proliferation, migration, and angiogenesis. This prospective open-label, randomised, comparative, multi-centre, investigator-initiated study compared the safety and effectiveness of adjuvant therapy with topical application of autologous growth factor concentrate (AGFC) using the Healrex® therapy kit (Wockhardt, India) versus standard of care (SoC) in DFUs. Methods Fifty-two adult men and women with DFU (Grades I or II as per Maggitt-Wagner classification) were randomised to the Healrex® (n = 26) or SoC (n = 26) group. AGFC concentrate was prepared using the Healrex® therapy kit, and application was from baseline to day 70 (visit 2 to visit 16). Wound assessment and size estimation post debridement were done from screening, i.e., day -03 to -01 day to 70 days (visit 1 to visit 16). The primary outcome was complete response defined as the proportion of patients having healthy granulation tissue covering ≥75% of the ulcer surface at the test of cure (ToC) or visit 17, whereas secondary outcomes were the percentage of patients with complete wound closure at ToC/visit 17, mean percentage reduction of ulcer size at ToC/visit 17 and time to appearance of healthy granulation tissues. Safety was measured in the form of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) reported, deviations in the desirable range of parameters determined using laboratory tests (haematology, serum biochemistry, urine examination), and electrocardiogram (ECG) done from baseline to ToC. Two patients were lost to follow-up, and one from the Healrex® arm was withdrawn from the study, resulting in a final efficacy analysis on 49 participants (24 in the Healrex® group and 25 in the SoC group) in the per-protocol (PP) dataset. Safety analysis was conducted on the intention-to-treat (ITT) dataset, which included all 52 participants. Results Complete response was observed in all 24 patients (n = 24 (100.0%)) with Healrex® compared to only n = 21 (84.0%) with SoC (p = 0.042). Complete wound closure was observed in 11 patients (n = 24 (45.8%)) treated with Healrex® compared to 13 patients (n = 13 (52.0%)) with SoC. The time required for wound closure was similar (p = 0.669) in the two groups. A greater reduction in the ulcer area was observed with Healrex® as against SoC (p < 0.0001). The time for the emergence of healthy granulation tissue was comparable between the two groups (p = 0.342). Ten patients with Healrex® reported mild adverse events (headache, fever, and cold) and none with SoC. Conclusion AGFC application using the Healrex® therapy kit as an adjuvant to standard wound care provides better outcomes compared to SoC alone in the management of DFUs.

Leveraging the outcome of a frontal bone tumor facial reconstruction case by a multimodal approach

The importance of multimodality in the diagnosis and treatment of medical conditions cannot be overemphasized. Herewith a case of facial malignancy encompassing all stages of management and requiring multimodal approaches for diagnosis, oncological treatment, anatomical reconstruction, and ultimately aesthetics and "identity" is presented.

Wound healing rates in COPD patients undergoing traditional pulmonary rehabilitation versus tailored Wound-Centric interventions

This comparative cross-sectional study, conducted at Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, aimed to evaluate the efficacy of tailored wound-centric interventions (TWCI) versus traditional pulmonary rehabilitation (TPR) in enhancing wound healing in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Enrolling 340 patients with confirmed COPD, the study randomly assigned participants to either the TWCI or TPR group for a 12-week programme. The primary outcome measured was the rate of wound healing, with secondary outcomes including changes in pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and quality of life (QoL) scores. The TWCI group received a customized programme integrating standard pulmonary rehabilitation with specific wound care strategies, such as enhanced oxygen therapy, nutritional supplementation, and infection control measures. In contrast, the TPR group underwent a conventional pulmonary rehabilitation programme without targeted wound care interventions. Wound healing rates, PFTs, and QoL scores were assessed at the end of the intervention and 3 months post-intervention. The TWCI group demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in wound healing rates compared with the TPR group. The TWCI group had a 15% higher rate of reduction in wound size, a 10% rise in complete healing rates, and a 20% drop in infection rates (p < 0.05). Specifically, TWCI group exhibited higher rates of wound size reduction, complete healing, and decreased infection rates. Additionally, long-term pulmonary function and overall quality of life improvements were more pronounced in the tailored group, underscoring the benefits of a personalized approach to managing COPD and wound care. The study concluded that integrating wound-specific care strategies with pulmonary rehabilitation significantly enhances health outcomes in COPD patients with wounds. These findings supported the adoption of customized, multidisciplinary care plans, suggesting that tailored interventions can offer a comprehensive solution to the complex needs of COPD patients, potentially redefining best practices in chronic disease management.

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.

Enhancing angiogenesis: Innovative drug delivery systems to facilitate diabetic wound healing

Diabetic wounds (DW) constitute a substantial burden on global healthcare owing to their widespread occurrence as a complication of diabetes. Angiogenesis, a crucial process, plays a pivotal role in tissue recovery by supplying essential oxygen and nutrients to the injury site. Unfortunately, in diabetes mellitus, various factors disrupt angiogenesis, hindering wound healing. While biomaterials designed to enhance angiogenesis hold promise for the treatment of DWs, there is an urgent need for more in-depth investigations to fully unlock their potential in clinical management. In this review, we explore the intricate mechanisms of angiogenesis that are crucial for DW recovery. We introduce a rational design for angiogenesis-enhancing drug delivery systems (DDS) and provide a comprehensive summary and discussion of diverse biomaterials that enhance angiogenesis for facilitating DW healing. Lastly, we address emerging challenges and prospects in angiogenesis-enhancing DDS for facilitating DW healing, aiming to offer a comprehensive understanding of this critical healthcare issue and potential solutions.

Investigation of the Properties of Linen Fibers and Dressings

In antiquity, flax was used as a dressing for healing wounds. Currently, work is underway on the genetic modification of flax fibers to improve their properties. Genetic modifications have resulted in an increased content of antioxidants and more favorable mechanical properties. The works published so far have presented independent tests of fibers and dressings after appropriate technological treatments in cell cultures. This study aimed to compare the properties of the fibers and the dressing produced in cell cultures—hamster fibroblasts—V79. The research material was traditional NIKE fibers; genetically modified M, B, and MB fibers; and linen dressings obtained from these fibers. The extract from 48-h incubation of 40 mg of fiber in the culture medium, which was desolved into 10, 20, and 30 mg, was administered to the cell culture. On the other hand, a linen dressing was placed on cells with an area of 0.5 cm², 1 cm², 1.5 cm², and 2 cm². Cells with fiber or dressing were incubated for 48 h, and then, biological tests were performed, including cell viability (in propidium iodide staining), cell proliferation (in the SRB assay), evaluation of the intracellular free radical level (in the DCF-DA assay), genotoxicity (in the comet assay), assessment of the apoptotic and necrotic cells (in staining anexin-V and iodide propidium), the course of the cell cycle, and the scratch test. The correlation between apoptosis and genotoxicity and the levels of free radicals and genotoxicity were determined for the tested linen fibers and fabrics. The tests presented that the fibers are characterized by the ability to eliminate damaged cells in the elimination phase. However, the obtained fabrics gain different properties during the technological processing of the fibers into linen dressings. Linen fabrics have better regenerative properties for cells than fibers. The linseed dressing made of MB fiber has the most favorable regenerative properties.