The efficacy of autologous platelet-rich gel and traditional Chinese medicine in diabetic foot treatment: a parallel randomized controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Diabetic Foot (DF) is a prevalent metabolic infection. DF wounds are the basis for all cases of non-traumatic lower limbs amputations in diabetes. DF care approaches include debridement of wound, pressure relief in the wounded area, proper wound, infection and ischemia management. However, there is a need for research to develop more effective therapeutic approaches. This study investigated the effectivity and safety of autologous platelet-rich gel combined with conventional treatment and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) in diabetic foot ulcers therapy.

METHODS

Sixty diabetic foot ulcer patients were divided into treatment and control groups of 30 patients each. The treatment group involved a combination of autologous platelet-rich gel, conventional treatment, and TCM. The control group was only treated with a combination of conventional therapy and TCM. Laboratory variables, including platelets, hemoglobin, albumin, and HbA1c, were analyzed and compared between treatment and control groups at baseline and end-point. Healing area, volume, and rates were compared in both groups.

RESULTS

basic patients' data and the wound conditions had no significant difference between treatment and control group. The treatment and control groups cure rates were 93.3% vs. 50%, respectively. The healing rate per two weeks was significantly higher in the treatment than in control group (0.78±0.05 vs. 0.43±0.04). There was no statistically significant difference in the platelets, hemoglobin, albumin, and HbA1c levels in the treatment and control groups.

CONCLUSION

Autologous platelet-rich gel combined with conventional treatment and traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is effective and safe for diabetic foot ulcers treatment.

Assessment of wound healing efficacy of Growth Factor Concentrate (GFC) in non-diabetic and diabetic Sprague Dawley rats

Backgrounds

The investigation of wound healing potential of human GFC (growth factor concentrate) was undertaken in diabetic and non-diabetic rats. Primarily, GFC is the combination of several growth factors present in blood which has potential of wound healing. In present study, WCK-GFC kit, a single step optimized kit was used for obtaining human GFC.

Methods

Diabetes in rats was induced by intraperitoneal single injection of 40 mg/kg streptozotocin (STZ). The full thickness circular wounds of 2 cm² area were created using sterilized stainless steel biopsy punch. Non-diabetic wounds were topically treated with 100µL and 300µL of GFC, while diabetic wounds were treated with 300µL of GFC. The standard of care treatment groups were included, wherein the non-diabetic and diabetic wound were topically treated with Nadoxin and Z-AD-G skin cream, respectively. The percentage of wound contraction was measured on weekly intervals. At the end of study duration, tissues from wound were collected for histopathological evaluation.

Results

Both diabetic and non-diabetic GFC treated rats exhibited a significantly higher rate of wound contraction on day 8 and 15 compared to normal untreated control group and standard-of-care treated rats. Wound healing was induced by GFC through rapid re-epithelialization. On comparing wound healing with standard-of care agent, the GFC treated wounds demonstrated a faster remodeling phase, a better organization and lower inflammation.

Conclusions

The current study demonstrates that topically applied GFC promotes healing of wounds, with enhanced wound contraction in both non-diabetic and diabetic rats.

Systematic literature review evaluating evidence and mechanisms of action for platelet-rich plasma as an antibacterial agent

Platelet rich plasma or PRP is a supraphysiologic concentrate of platelets derived by centrifugation and separation of whole blood components. Along with platelets and plasma, PRP contains various cell types including white blood cells (WBC)/leukocytes, both granulocytes (neutrophils, basophils, eosinophils) and agranulocytes (monocytes, lymphocytes). Researchers and clinicians have explored the application of PRP in wound healing and prevention of surgical wound infections, such as deep sternal wounds. We conducted this systematic literature review to evaluate the preclinical and clinical evidence for the antibacterial effect of PRP and its potential mechanism of action. 526 records were identified for screening. 34 unique articles were identified to be included in this literature review for data summary. Overall, the quality of the clinical trials in this review is low, and collectively qualify as Oxford level C. Based on the available clinical data, there is a clear trend towards safety of autologous PRP and potential efficacy in deep sternal wound management. The preclinical and bench data is very compelling. The application of PRP in treatment of wounds or prevention of infection with PRP is promising but there is a need for foundational bench and preclinical animal research to optimize PRP as an antibacterial agent, and to provide data to aid in the design and conduct of well-designed RCTs with adequate power to confirm antimicrobial efficacy of PRP in specific disease states and wound types.

Application of Topical Sucralfate and Topical Platelet-Rich Plasma Improves Wound Healing in Diabetic Ulcer Rats Wound Model

Purpose

One of the most serious and devastating complications of diabetes mellitus is diabetic ulcers. They are difficult to treat and often result in limb loss. Topical sucralfate and platelet-rich plasma have the potential to improve the healing outcomes of chronic ulcers, including diabetic ulcers. This research aims to determine the effectiveness of sucralfate and platelet-rich plasma therapy for the improvement of diabetic ulcer wound healing.

Patients and Methods

Ninety Wistar rats were used in this study and were classified into five groups. Four of the five groups were diabetic induced and were treated with topical sucralfate only, platelet-rich plasma only, combination of topical sucralfate and platelet-rich plasma, and diabetic control group which received standard therapy only. The non-diabetic control group did not receive any therapy. We observed macrophage amount, platelet-derived growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and hypoxia-inducible factor as a biomarker. Rats were terminated after 7th and 14th days and were subjected to immunohistochemistry staining and examination.

Results

We found that topical sucralfate and platelet-rich plasma increase macrophage levels, vascular endothelial growth factor expression and platelet-derived growth factor expression in diabetic wound cells. We also found a reduction in hypoxia inducible factor-1α expression. Combination of topical sucralfate and platelet-rich plasma for 14 days gave the most significant improvement in terms of wound healing compared to topical sucralfate or platelet-rich plasma alone.

Conclusion

The combination of topical sucralfate and platelet-rich plasma therapy results in the best improvement in diabetic ulcer wound healing compared to sucralfate or platelet-rich plasma monotherapy or conventional wound healing therapy.

Topical effect of allogenous serum rich in growth factors (SRGF) on diabetic skin wound in rat

Diabetic foot ulcer is a major complication of diabetes mellitus with negative effects on the life quality. Management of diabetic foot ulcers is a big challenge with poor and low sufficient outcome management. Therefore, achievement to effective treatments may treat these ulcers. Nowdays, platelet products are used as an effective and safe agent for promotion of healing proposes in regenerative medicine. Serum rich in growth factors (SRGF) is a source of released growth factors from the platelets. In the present study, effect of allogenous SRGF was investigated on the streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetic wounds in rats. STZ (50 mg/kh, SC) caused significant increase in blood glucose and weight loss in rats. Full thickness cutaneous wounds (8 mm diameter) were created bilaterally on the dorsal of the diabetic rats. SRGF was injected at the edges of the wounds of one side only on the first day, and the contrary sides were considered as the control group. The percentage of wound contraction was demonstrared on day 3, 7, 11 after surgery. Tissue specimens were collected for microscopic study on days 7 and 14. Results showed a significant higher rate of wound contraction on days 5 and 7 in the treated group. Histopathologic findings displayed acceleration of re-epithelialization, increased angiogenesis and dense collagen fibers with better organization in the treated group. Current study suggests that SRGF was efficient because facilate wound healing and showed rapid re-epithelialization and increased angiogenesis.

Topical antimicrobial agents for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes

BACKGROUND

People with diabetes are at high risk for developing foot ulcers, which often become infected. These wounds, especially when infected, cause substantial morbidity. Wound treatments should aim to alleviate symptoms, promote healing, and avoid adverse outcomes, especially lower extremity amputation. Topical antimicrobial therapy has been used on diabetic foot ulcers, either as a treatment for clinically infected wounds, or to prevent infection in clinically uninfected wounds.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of treatment with topical antimicrobial agents on: the resolution of signs and symptoms of infection; the healing of infected diabetic foot ulcers; and preventing infection and improving healing in clinically uninfected diabetic foot ulcers.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Ovid Embase, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus in August 2016. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and checked reference lists to identify additional studies. We used no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication, or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials conducted in any setting (inpatient or outpatient) that evaluated topical treatment with any type of solid or liquid (e.g., cream, gel, ointment) antimicrobial agent, including antiseptics, antibiotics, and antimicrobial dressings, in people with diabetes mellitus who were diagnosed with an ulcer or open wound of the foot, whether clinically infected or uninfected.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and data extraction. Initial disagreements were resolved by discussion, or by including a third review author when necessary.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 22 trials that met our inclusion criteria with a total of over 2310 participants (one study did not report number of participants). The included studies mostly had small numbers of participants (from 4 to 317) and relatively short follow-up periods (4 to 24 weeks). At baseline, six trials included only people with ulcers that were clinically infected; one trial included people with both infected and uninfected ulcers; two trials included people with non-infected ulcers; and the remaining 13 studies did not report infection status.Included studies employed various topical antimicrobial treatments, including antimicrobial dressings (e.g. silver, iodides), super-oxidised aqueous solutions, zinc hyaluronate, silver sulphadiazine, tretinoin, pexiganan cream, and chloramine. We performed the following five comparisons based on the included studies: Antimicrobial dressings compared with non-antimicrobial dressings: Pooled data from five trials with a total of 945 participants suggest (based on the average treatment effect from a random-effects model) that more wounds may heal when treated with an antimicrobial dressing than with a non-antimicrobial dressing: risk ratio (RR) 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12 to 1.45. These results correspond to an additional 119 healing events in the antimicrobial-dressing arm per 1000 participants (95% CI 51 to 191 more). We consider this low-certainty evidence (downgraded twice due to risk of bias). The evidence on adverse events or other outcomes was uncertain (very low-certainty evidence, frequently downgraded due to risk of bias and imprecision). Antimicrobial topical treatments (non dressings) compared with non-antimicrobial topical treatments (non dressings): There were four trials with a total of 132 participants in this comparison that contributed variously to the estimates of outcome data. Evidence was generally of low or very low certainty, and the 95% CIs spanned benefit and harm: proportion of wounds healed RR 2.82 (95% CI 0.56 to 14.23; 112 participants; 3 trials; very low-certainty evidence); achieving resolution of infection RR 1.16 (95% CI 0.54 to 2.51; 40 participants; 1 trial; low-certainty evidence); undergoing surgical resection RR 1.67 (95% CI 0.47 to 5.90; 40 participants; 1 trial; low-certainty evidence); and sustaining an adverse event (no events in either arm; 81 participants; 2 trials; very low-certainty evidence). Comparison of different topical antimicrobial treatments: We included eight studies with a total of 250 participants, but all of the comparisons were different and no data could be appropriately pooled. Reported outcome data were limited and we are uncertain about the relative effects of antimicrobial topical agents for each of our review outcomes for this comparison, that is wound healing, resolution of infection, surgical resection, and adverse events (all very low-certainty evidence). Topical antimicrobials compared with systemic antibiotics : We included four studies with a total of 937 participants. These studies reported no wound-healing data, and the evidence was uncertain for the relative effects on resolution of infection in infected ulcers and surgical resection (very low certainty). On average, there is probably little difference in the risk of adverse events between the compared topical antimicrobial and systemic antibiotics treatments: RR 0.91 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.06; moderate-certainty evidence - downgraded once for inconsistency). Topical antimicrobial agents compared with growth factor: We included one study with 40 participants. The only review-relevant outcome reported was number of ulcers healed, and these data were uncertain (very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The randomised controlled trial data on the effectiveness and safety of topical antimicrobial treatments for diabetic foot ulcers is limited by the availability of relatively few, mostly small, and often poorly designed trials. Based on our systematic review and analysis of the literature, we suggest that: 1) use of an antimicrobial dressing instead of a non-antimicrobial dressing may increase the number of diabetic foot ulcers healed over a medium-term follow-up period (low-certainty evidence); and 2) there is probably little difference in the risk of adverse events related to treatment between systemic antibiotics and topical antimicrobial treatments based on the available studies (moderate-certainty evidence). For each of the other outcomes we examined there were either no reported data or the available data left us uncertain as to whether or not there were any differences between the compared treatments. Given the high, and increasing, frequency of diabetic foot wounds, we encourage investigators to undertake properly designed randomised controlled trials in this area to evaluate the effects of topical antimicrobial treatments for both the prevention and the treatment of infection in these wounds and ultimately the effects on wound healing.

Platelet-Rich Plasma for the Treatment of Clean Diabetic Foot Ulcers

BACKGROUND

Diabetic foot ulcer is considered as a major health problem that predisposes to limb amputation. Among the different methods to achieve ulcer healing, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) gel is gaining popularity. It is thought to stimulate wound closure by providing essential growth factors for healing. This study aims to evaluate the value of autologous PRP gel in the treatment of diabetic ulcers.

METHODS

The study included 56 patients of both sex from 18 to 80 years, with clean chronic diabetic foot ulcers divided into 2 equal groups. The first group was treated by antiseptic ointment dressing, and the second group was treated by autologous platelet gel. PRP together with thrombin were prepared by centrifugation at each dressing session. Thrombin and calcium chloride were used to activate the PRP. The formed platelet gel was applied to the wound twice weekly.

RESULTS

Statically significant increase in healing rate was found in the PRP-treated group, and complete healing was achieved in 86% of them in comparison to 68% of the control group. In the study group, rate of healing per week was greater during the first 8 weeks and starts to decline afterward. The use of platelet gel showed a lower rate of wound infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Autologous platelet gel is more effective than the local antiseptic dressing in terms of healing rate and prevention of infection in clean diabetic ulcers.