Medical Versus Surgical Treatment for the Management of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis: A Systematic Review

Variation in Systemic Antibiotic Treatment for Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis in England and Wales: A Multi-Centre Case Review

Background: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is a major complication and can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Systemic antibiotic therapy is often initiated first line to achieve quiescence of infection. To perform a multi-centre case review of systemic antibiotic intervention to treat adults with DFO in England and Wales and compare with national guidelines 'Diabetic foot problems: prevention and management'. Methods: Eight centres from England and Wales retrospectively collated data from a minimum of five adults (aged ≥ 18 years) from electronic case records. All patients were treated with systemic antibiotics following a new diagnosis of DFO (1 June 2021-31 December 2021). Results: 40 patients (35 males and 5 females) were included; the mean age was 62.3 years (standard deviation (SD) 13.0). Patients commenced systemic oral 14 (35%) or intravenous 26 (65%) antibiotic therapy following a new diagnosis of DFO. Twenty-seven (67.5%) patients were medically or surgically managed in the 12-week period with clinical quiescence of infection. Twenty-one patients (52.5%) had no recurrence of DFO infection within 12 weeks; seventeen (42.5%) of these patients had clinical quiescence of infection with systemic antibiotics alone without surgical intervention and nine (22.5%) of these cases had no recurrence of DFO. There were no cases of major amputation or death. All centres showed significant in-centre variability in systemic antibiotic management; variability was reported in the clinical and quantity indicators specifically to antibiotic selection, single versus dual therapy, mode of delivery and duration of treatment. Conclusions: This case review identifies there is existing variation when treating adults with systemic antibiotics for DFO. Further national guidance is required to standardise service delivery and care to improve patient outcomes.

Interventions in the management of diabetes-related foot infections: A systematic review

The optimal approaches to managing diabetic foot infections remain a challenge for clinicians. Despite an exponential rise in publications investigating different treatment strategies, the various agents studied generally produce comparable results, and high-quality data are scarce. In this systematic review, we searched the medical literature using the PubMed and Embase databases for published studies on the treatment of diabetic foot infections from 30 June 2018 to 30 June 2022. We combined this search with our previous literature search of a systematic review performed in 2020, in which the infection committee of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot searched the literature until June 2018. We defined the context of the literature by formulating clinical questions of interest, then developing structured clinical questions (Patients-Intervention-Control-Outcomes) to address these. We only included data from controlled studies of an intervention to prevent or cure a diabetic foot infection. Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion and then assessed their relevant outcomes and methodological quality. Our literature search identified a total of 5,418 articles, of which we selected 32 for full-text review. Overall, the newly available studies we identified since 2018 do not significantly modify the body of the 2020 statements for the interventions in the management of diabetes-related foot infections. The recent data confirm that outcomes in patients treated with the different antibiotic regimens for both skin and soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis of the diabetes-related foot are broadly equivalent across studies, with a few exceptions (tigecycline not non-inferior to ertapenem [±vancomycin]). The newly available data suggest that antibiotic therapy following surgical debridement for moderate or severe infections could be reduced to 10 days and to 3 weeks for osteomyelitis following surgical debridement of bone. Similar outcomes were reported in studies comparing primarily surgical and predominantly antibiotic treatment strategies in selected patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis. There is insufficient high-quality evidence to assess the effect of various recent adjunctive therapies, such as cold plasma for infected foot ulcers and bioactive glass for osteomyelitis. Our updated systematic review confirms a trend to a better quality of the most recent trials and the need for further well-designed trials to produce higher quality evidence to underpin our recommendations.

Clinical practice recommendations for infectious disease management of diabetic foot infection (DFI) - 2023 SPILF

In march 2020, the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) published an update of the 2015 guidelines on the diagnosis and management of diabetic foot infection (DFI). While we (the French ID society, SPILF) endorsed some of these recommendations, we wanted to update our own 2006 guidelines and specifically provide informative elements on modalities of microbiological diagnosis and antibiotic treatment (especially first- and second-line regiments, oral switch and duration). The recommendations put forward in the present guidelines are addressed to healthcare professionals managing patients with DFI and more specifically focused on infectious disease management of this type of infection, which clearly needs a multidisciplinary approach. Staging of the severity of the infection is mandatory using the classification drawn up by the IWGDF. Microbiological samples should be taken only in the event of clinical signs suggesting infection in accordance with a strict preliminarily established protocol. Empirical antibiotic therapy should be chosen according to the IWGDF grade of infection and duration of the wound, but must always cover methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus. Early reevaluation of the patient is a fundamental step, and duration of antibiotic therapy can be shortened in many situations. When osteomyelitis is suspected, standard foot radiograph is the first-line imagery examination and a bone biopsy should be performed for microbiological documentation. Histological analysis of the bone sample is no longer recommended. High dosages of antibiotics are recommended in cases of confirmed osteomyelitis.

How to do and evaluate DWI and DCE-MRI sequences for diabetic foot assessment

MRI evaluation of the diabetic foot is still a challenge not only from an interpretative but also from a technical point of view. The incorporation of advanced sequences such as diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) MRI into standard protocols for diabetic foot assessment could aid radiologists in differentiating between neuropathic osteoarthropathy (Charcot's foot) and osteomyelitis. This distinction is crucial as both conditions can coexist in diabetic patients, and they require markedly different clinical management and have distinct prognoses. Over the past decade, several studies have explored the effectiveness of DWI and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) in distinguishing between septic and reactive bone marrow, as well as soft tissue involvement in diabetic patients, yielding promising results. DWI, without the need for exogenous contrast, can provide insights into the cellularity of bone marrow and soft tissues. DCE-MRI allows for a more precise evaluation of soft tissue and bone marrow perfusion compared to conventional post-gadolinium imaging. The data obtained from these sequences will complement the traditional MRI approach in assessing the diabetic foot. The objective of this review is to familiarize readers with the fundamental concepts of DWI and DCE-MRI, including technical adjustments and practical tips for image interpretation in diabetic foot cases.

Analysis of the Influence of Diabetic Nephropathy in Patients with Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis

This study analyzed the influence of diabetic nephropathy on the healing prognosis after conservative surgery in diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). A retrospective observational study was carried out between January 2021 and December 2022 and involved 278 outpatients with a diagnosis of DFO at a specialized diabetic foot unit, including 74 (26.62%) patients with DN (group 2) and 204 (73.38%) patients without DN (group 1). There were 266 (95.70%) ulcers on the forefoot, 8 (2.90%) on the midfoot, and 4 (1.45%) on the hindfoot (p = 0.992). The healing rates were 85.1% (n = 63) for group 2 and 81.3% (n = 165) for group 1 (p = 0.457). When exploring the influence of DN on the risk of delayed ulcer healing, the results did not show a significant effect [12 (6; 28) weeks among patients with DN vs. 12 (6; 21) weeks among patients without DN; p = 0.576]. No significant differences were observed in complications, with one (2.59%) death occurring in group 1 (p = 0.296) and three minor amputations being performed in both groups [two (5.13%) amputations in group 1 vs. one amputation (9.09%) in group 2; p = 0.217]. Bone cultures were performed for a total of 190 patients (133 in group 1 and 57 in group 2). Of these, 176 positive bone cultures were isolated: 71 positive bone cultures (57.7%) were monomicrobial cultures in group 1, with 30 (56.6%) in group 2. There were 52 (42.3%) that had at least two microorganisms in group 1, and 23 (43.4%) in group 2 (p = 0.890). The most frequently prescribed oral antibiotic was amoxicillin/clavulanate (43.89%), followed by levofloxacin (28.4%), and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (14.7%). This study shows that DN does not have a significant influence on the healing prognosis of patients with DFO after conservative surgery.

Systemic Antimicrobial Therapy for Diabetic Foot Infections: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) are a common complication of diabetes; however, there is clinical uncertainty regarding the optimal antimicrobial selection. The aim of this review was to critically evaluate the recent systematic reviews on the efficacy and safety of systemic (parenteral or oral) antimicrobials for DFI. Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases and the PROSPERO register were searched from January 2015 to January 2023. Systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses on systemic antimicrobials for DFI, with outcomes of clinical infection resolution or complications, were included. Of the 413 records identified, 6 systematic reviews of 29 individual studies were included. Heterogeneity of individual studies precluded meta-analysis, except for ertapenem versus piperacillin-tazobactam (RR 1.07, 95% CI [0.96-1.19]) and fluoroquinolones versus piperacillin-tazobactam (RR 1.03, 95% CI [0.89-1.20]) in one review. The application of the AMSTAR-2 tool determined two reviews to be of high quality. There was no statistical difference in the clinical resolution of infections for 24 different antimicrobial regimens (penicillins, cephalosporins, carbapenems, fluoroquinolones, vancomycin, metronidazole, clindamycin, linezolid, daptomycin, and tigecycline). However, tigecycline did not meet non-inferiority against ertapenem ± vancomycin (absolute difference -5.5%, 95% CI [-11.0-0.1]) and was associated with a higher incidence of adverse drug events. There is minimal systematic review evidence to suggest one regimen is superior to another for DFI.

Bacterial Diversity and Antibiotic Resistance in Patients with Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis

This study analysed the bacterial diversity, antibiotic susceptibility, and resistance in patients with complications of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). A retrospective observational study was carried out between September 2019 and September 2022 and involved 215 outpatients with a diagnosis of DFO at a specialized diabetic foot unit. A total of 204 positive bone cultures were isolated, including 62.7% monomicrobial cultures, and 37.3% were formed with at least two microorganisms. We observed that Proteus spp., Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, and Corynebacterium were the most frequently isolated microorganisms and accounted for more than 10% of the DFO cases. With stratification by Gram-positive (GP) and Gram-negative (GN) bacteria, we observed that 91.6% of cultures presented at least one GP bacteria species, and 50.4% presented at least one GN bacteria species. The most common GP species were CoNS (29%), S. aureus (25.8%), and Corynebacterium spp. (14%). The most frequent GN species consisted of Proteus spp. (32%), P. aeruginosa (23.3%), and E. coli (17.5%). The main antibiotics with resistance to GP-dominated infections were penicillins without β-lactamase inhibitor, and those in GN-dominated infections were sulfonamides and penicillins without β-lactamase. Significant differences were not observed in mean healing time in DFU with acute osteomyelitis (12.76 weeks (4.50;18)) compared to chronic osteomyelitis (15.31 weeks (7;18.25); p = 0.101) and when comparing cases with soft tissue infection (15.95 (6;20)) and those without such an infection (16.59 (7.25;19.75), p = 0.618). This study shows that when treatment of DFO is based on early surgical treatment, the type of DFO and the presence of soft infection are not associated with different or worse prognoses.

Variables That Could Influence Healing Time in Patients with Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis

AIM

To compare the healing time in patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis according to the presence or absence of clinical signs of infection, variation of blood parameters, the presence of different radiological signs, and the treatment received for the management of osteomyelitis.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was carried out in a specialised Diabetic Foot Unit between November 2014 and November 2018. A total of 116 patients with osteomyelitis were included in the study (treated by either a surgical or medical approach). During the baseline visit, we assessed the diagnosis of osteomyelitis, demographic characteristics and medical history, vascular and neurological examination, clinical signs of infection, increased blood parameters, radiological signs of osteomyelitis, and the treatment to manage osteomyelitis. We analysed the association between the presence of clinical signs of infection, variation of blood parameters, presence of radiological signs, and treatment received for management of osteomyelitis with the healing time.

RESULTS

The mean time to ulcer healing was 15.8 ± 9.7 weeks. Concerning healing times, we did not find an association with the presence of clinical signs of infection or with the increase in blood parameters, except in the case of eosinophils, which with higher values appear to increase the healing time (U = 66, z = -2.880, p = 0.004). Likewise, no relationship has been found between healing time and the appearance of the different radiological signs of osteomyelitis, nor depending on the treatment administered for the management of osteomyelitis.

CONCLUSION

High levels of eosinophils are associated with a longer healing time of diabetic foot ulcers complicated with osteomyelitis, finding no other factors related to increased healing time.

Could X-ray Predict Long-term Complications in Patients with Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis?

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the association between radiologic changes on plain X-rays in patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis and the development of complications at the 1-year follow-up.

METHODS

A prospective, observational study was conducted involving 115 patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis. X-ray features that were evaluated during 1-year follow-up visits included affected bone marrow, active periosteal reaction, sequestrum, cortical disruption, and other types of signs. Researchers analyzed the association between the presence of X-ray changes and complication development, such as bone or soft tissue infections, ulcer recurrence, reulceration, amputation, death, and other diabetic foot disease-related events.

RESULTS

During follow-up, of 115 patients included in the study, 33 patients (28.7%) showed radiologic changes, and 85 (73.9%) developed complications. The presence of radiologic changes after ulcer healing had a significant association with complication development during the 1-year follow-up in addition to those found at different follow-up visits. Patients who showed radiologic changes had higher percentages of complications during the 1-year follow-up, and patients without radiologic changes had lower percentages of complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of radiologic changes is related to the development of complications in patients who suffer from diabetic foot osteomyelitis.

Are Digital Arthroplasty and Arthrodesis Useful and Safe Surgical Techniques for the Management of Patients with Diabetic Foot?

OBJECTIVE

To analyze and compare the development of short- and long-term complications in patients with diabetic foot after digital arthroplasty or arthrodesis.

METHODS

The authors reviewed patient records from January 2017 to March 2020. Patients were treated by digital arthroplasty or arthrodesis to correct toe deformity (elective or prophylactic surgery), achieve ulcer healing in toes (curative surgery), or manage toe infection (emergent surgery). During 1-year follow-up, researchers registered short- and long-term complications. Researchers analyzed the association between the type of surgery and the development of short- and long-term complications.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients (83.0%) received arthroplasty, and nine (17.0%) received arthrodesis. The mean time to heal from ulcers was 5.2 ± 5.2 weeks. A significant association was observed between arthrodesis and the development of long-term complications (P = .044; odds ratio, 5.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.9-27.2). No differences were observed between type of surgery and short- or long-term complications. Moreover, both short- and long-term complications were related to longer time to heal (respectively, 7.6 ± 6.0 vs 2.1 ± 0.5 weeks, P < .001; and 6.3 ± 6.2 vs 4.2 ± 4.0 weeks, P = .039).

CONCLUSIONS

Digital arthroplasty or arthrodesis are good options for managing patients with diabetic foot who require digital deformity correction to achieve digital ulcer healing or management of diabetic foot infection in phalanges.

Efficacy of Early Closed Toe Amputation for Toe Ulcers with Suspected Osteomyelitis after Revascularization for Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia

Objective: In this study, we aim to evaluate the efficacy of early closed toe amputation on the wound management of toe ulcers with suspected osteomyelitis after revascularization for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI).

Methods: This retrospective study included patients who have underwent revascularization for toe ulcers associated with CLTI at Shizuoka Red Cross Hospital from 2015 to 2021. Wound management comprised early closed toe amputation for toe ulcers with suspected osteomyelitis (19 toes in 17 patients) or conservative treatment (35 toes in 26 patients). The primary endpoint was wound healing after revascularization. We compared the wound healing rate at 90 days and median healing time of early closed toe amputation versus conservative treatment.

Results: Compared with the conservative treatment, early closed toe amputation was able to achieve a better wound healing rate at 90 days (89.5% vs. 68.6%; P<0.01) and a shorter median healing time (19 days vs. 62 days; P=0.01).

Conclusion: There remains no established wound management for toe lesions associated with CLTI. Despite its several disadvantages including wound infection and possible foot deformity, early closed toe amputation for toe ulcers with suspected osteomyelitis can be considered a safe approach in terms of wound management.

Opinions about the most appropriate surgical management of diabetes-related foot infection: a cross-sectional survey

Background

There is a lack of high quality evidence to guide the optimal management of diabetes-related foot infection, particularly in cases of severe diabetes-related foot infection and diabetes-related foot osteomyelitis. This study examined the opinions of surgeons about the preferred management of severe diabetes-related foot infection.

Methods

Vascular and orthopaedic surgeons in Australia and New Zealand were invited to complete an online survey via email. The survey included multi-choice and open-ended questions on clinical management of diabetes-related foot infection. Responses of vascular surgeons and orthopaedic surgeons were compared using non-parametric statistical tests. Open-text responses were examined using inductive content analysis.

Results

29 vascular and 20 orthopaedic surgeons completed the survey. One-third (28.6%) used best-practice guidelines to assist in decisions about foot infection management. Areas for guideline improvement identified included more specific advice regarding the indications for available treatments, more recommendations about non-surgical patient management and advice on how management can be varied in regions with limited health service resource. The probe-to-bone test and magnetic resonance imaging were the preferred methods of diagnosing osteomyelitis. Approximately half (51.2%) of respondents indicated piperacillin combined with tazobactam as the preferred antibiotic choice for empirical treatment of severe diabetes-related foot infection. Negative pressure wound therapy was the most common way of managing a wound following debridement. All vascular surgeons (100%) made revascularisation decisions based on the severity of ischemia while most orthopaedic surgeons (66.7%) were likely to refer to vascular surgeons to make revascularisation decisions. Vascular surgeons preferred using wound swabs while orthopaedic surgeons favoured tissue or bone biopsies to determine the choice of antibiotic. Respondents perceived a moderate variation in management decisions between specialists and supported the need for randomised controlled trials to test different management pathways.

Conclusions

Most vascular and orthopaedic surgeons do not use best-practice guidelines to assist in decisions about management of diabetes-related foot infection. Vascular and orthopaedic surgeons appear to have different preferences for wound sampling to determine choice of antibiotic. There is a need for higher quality evidence to clarify best practice for managing diabetes-related foot infection.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13047-022-00523-w.

When amputation is not the end of the challenge: A successful therapy for osteomyelitis and soft tissue infection in a patient with type 1 diabetes

Infection is a common complication in patients with diabetic foot ulcer, leading to lower extremities amputation and healing failure. In this article, we report the case of a 39-year-old man with diabetes who developed a severe soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis after experiencing a major amputation for wet gangrene of both the foot and the ankle.

Evaluation of Adherence to the Oral Antibiotic Treatment in Patients With Diabetic Foot Infection

Introduction: The knowledge about level of adherence to oral antibiotic treatment in diabetic patients with ulcer infection could be essential as a method of evaluation/monitoring of conservative treatment. Aim: To assess the adherence to oral antibiotic treatment in outpatients with diabetic foot infection (soft tissue vs. osteomyelitis) by 8-item structured, self-reported medication adherence scale. Methods: cross-sectional study was carried out with 46 consecutive patients who had diabetic foot infection (soft tissue or bone infection) and required antibiotic oral treatment at outpatient clinical setting. Medication adherence was tested using the Spanish version of the validated eight-item self-report MMAS-8. Results: patients with diabetic ulcer infection, had well level of adherence to antibiotic medication (7   ±   1.2 vs. 7.4   ±   1.5). Patients with lower level of adherence had lower level of satisfaction with the antibiotic medication. The profile of the patients with lower level of adherence were patients with primary level of education and patient who required more help to take the medication. Conclusion: Patients with diabetic foot infection demonstrated well level of adherence to antibiotic medication, independently of type of infection (soft tissue vs. osteomyelitis) by 8-item structured, self-reported medication adherence scale.

Long-Term Complications after Surgical or Medical Treatment of Predominantly Forefoot Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis: 1 Year Follow Up

AIM

To compare long-term complications according to the treatment received for management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (surgical or medical) at 1 year follow up.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

A prospective observational study was conducted involving 116 patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis. The patients received surgical or medical treatment based on the principles described in the literature. To register the development of a complication, both groups of treatments were followed-up 1 year after the ulcer had healed.

RESULTS

Ninety-six (82.8%) patients received surgical treatment and 20 (17.2%) medical treatment. No differences were found in the time to healing between both groups of treatment, 15.7 ± 9.2 weeks in the surgical group versus 16.4 ± 12.1 weeks in the medical group; p = 0.103. During follow up, 85 (73.3%) patients developed complications without differences between both groups, 68 (70.8%) in the surgical group versus 17 (85%) in the medical group (p = 0.193). The most common complication in both groups was re-ulceration. We did not observe significant differences comparing complication-free time survival between both treatments (p = 0.665).

CONCLUSION

The onset of complications after healing in patients who suffered from diabetic foot osteomyelitis was not associated with the treatment received. Surgical and medical approaches to the management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis produced similar results in long-term follow up.