Differentiating diabetic foot ulcers that are unlikely to heal by 12 weeks following achieving 50% percent area reduction at 4 weeks
ABPM/UHM, Diversified Clinical Services, Jacksonville, Florida, USA. International Wound Journal
(Impact Factor: 2.15).
09/2011; 8(6):632-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2011.00860.x
This retrospective analysis included intent-to-treat control patient data from two published, randomised, diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) trials in an effort to differentiate ulcers that are unlikely to heal by 12 weeks despite early healing progress [≥50% percent area reduction (PAR) at 4 weeks]. Predicted and actual wound area trajectories in DFUs that achieved early healing progress were analysed from weeks 5 to 12 and compared for ulcers that did and did not heal at 12 weeks. In 120 patients who achieved ≥50% PAR by week 4, 62 (52%) failed to heal by 12 weeks. Deviations from the predicted healing course were evident by 6 weeks for non healing ulcers. A 2-week delay in healing significantly lowered healing rates (P = 0·001). For DFUs with ≥50% PAR at 4 weeks, those achieving ≥90% versus <90% PAR at 8 weeks had a 2·7-fold higher healing rate at 12 weeks (P = 0·001). A PAR of <90% at 8 weeks provided a negative predictive value for DFU healing at 12 weeks of 82%. For ulcers that fail to progress or worsen from weeks 4 to 6, and those that fail to achieve 90% PAR at 8 weeks, reevaluation of the wound and its treatment is recommended.
Figures in this publication
Available from: Joseph L Mills
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWDGF) has produced in 2011 a guideline on the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral arterial disease in patients with diabetes and a foot ulcer. This document, together with a systematic review that provided the background information on management, was produced by a multidisciplinary working group of experts in the field and was endorsed by the IWDGF. This progress report is based on these two documents and earlier consensus texts of the IWDGF on the diagnosis and management of diabetic foot ulcers. Its aim is to give the clinician clear guidance on when and how to diagnose peripheral arterial disease in patients with diabetes and a foot ulcer and when and which treatment modalities should be considered, taking both risks and benefits into account.
Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews 02/2012; 28 Suppl 1(S1):218-24. DOI:10.1002/dmrr.2255 · 3.55 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Chronic wounds, especially in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM), are a major health challenge in Japan. The goal of wound care centers (WCCs) in Japan is to facilitate healing and prevent lower extremity amputations (LEAs) using standardized protocols of patient and wound care. The standard treatment algorithm includes a complete patient and wound assessment, history, physical exam, and a variety of diagnostic tests that determine the need for infection control intervention, revascularization, excision and debridement, growth factor/platelet rich plasma (PRP) gel therapy, skin graft/ flap, wound protection, and education. All patient and wound data are entered in a secure central database for all WCCs. To evaluate the outcomes of standard care regimens compared to the use of a topical PRP gel treatment in patients with a variety of complex wounds, a retrospective, longitudinal study was conducted. Wound outcomes from 39 patients with 40 chronic, nonhealing, lower extremity wounds were evaluated between two time periods: between first presentation at the WCC (T1) and after using standard topical treatments (T2) and between T2 and after using the PRP gel treatment (T3). Patient average age was 66.8 years (SD: 10.60) and mean wound duration was 99.7 days before treatment (SD: 107.73); and the majority of patients (85%) had DM. Wounds were classified as ischemic diabetic (n = 24), diabetic (n = 10), ischemic (n = 5), and pressure ulcer (n = 1). DFUs were Wagner III (77%) and lV (23%). Of those, 60% were in patients with arteriosclerotic obliterans (ASO). Infection (abscess, cellulitis, osteomyelitis, and/or gangrene) was present in all wounds and treated using debridement, antibiotic therapy, and surgery as deemed appropriate. During the first treatment period (T1 to T2) of 75.3 days, which included revascularization and/or debridement along with standard of care, none of the wounds healed and the average wound area, depth, and volume increased. Following topical PRP gel treatment, 83% of wounds healed within 145.2 days (T2 to T3) (P = 0.00002). Only one patient required an LEA. The results of this study suggest that good healing outcomes and a low amputation rate can be obtained with a protocol of supportive care (including revascularization procedures) and the PRP gel treatment. Prospective controlled studies comparing the use of this PRP gel to other advanced treatments are warranted.
Ostomy/wound management 04/2012; 58(4):36-49. · 1.12 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: A retrospective case series demonstrating the use of dehydrated human amniotic membrane (dHAM) allografts in the treatment of wounds of various aetiologies. Amniotic membrane was applied to a series of chronic wounds referred to a formal wound clinic for aggressive management, after prior, traditional treatment methods were found ineffective, over a period of 1 month. In each case, failure of traditional therapy was followed by placement of a dehydrated amniotic membrane allograft and the healing time course was documented with charted measurements. Wounds treated with the amniotic membrane allograft demonstrated improved healing, with a change in the healing trajectory from that previously noted. Dehydrated human amniotic membrane represents a potentially effective addition to existing wound care therapies, with further formal clinical studies indicated.
Journal of Wound Care 06/2012; 21(6):290, 292, 294-6. DOI:10.12968/jowc.2012.21.6.290 · 1.07 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.