Evaluation of Antibiotic-Loaded Bone Cement in Treatment of Infected Diabetic Foot: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

IF 4.6 2区医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM

Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews Pub Date : 2024-11-04 DOI:10.1002/dmrr.70002

Hua Chen, Ling Yao, Yu Zhou, Jiezhi Dai

{"title":"Evaluation of Antibiotic-Loaded Bone Cement in Treatment of Infected Diabetic Foot: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"Hua Chen, Ling Yao, Yu Zhou, Jiezhi Dai","doi":"10.1002/dmrr.70002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a common and complex complication in patients with diabetes mellitus. The study of antibiotic-loaded bone cement for the treatment of infected diabetic foot is limited. We aimed to assess the efficacy of antibiotic-loaded bone cement for the treatment of infected diabetic foot.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Knowledge databases were systematically searched up to May 2023 with no language restrictions. We assessed eligible studies for the efficacy of antibiotic-loaded bone cement for the treatment of infected diabetic foot. The standard mean differences (SMDs) or the risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for continuous or dichotomous data, respectively. Data were analysed using the Cochrane Collaboration's RevMan 5.0 software.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Nine articles with 565 patients were analysed in our meta-analysis. The wound healing time in ABC group was significantly shorter than that in the control group (SMD = −1.64, 95% CI −2.27 to −1.02 <i>p</i> < 0.00001, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 88%). The ABC group had a significantly decreased number of debridements (SMD = −2.47, 95% CI −4.24 to −0.70, <i>p</i> < 0.00001, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 95%). The pooled data showed no significant difference (RR = 0.41, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.39, <i>p</i> = 0.84, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>This is the first meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of antibiotic-loaded bone cement for the treatment of infected diabetic foot. Antibiotic-loaded bone cement treatment significantly shortened the wound healing time and reduced the number of debridements without increasing the incidence of complications.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\n \n <p>PROSPERO CRD42023406017</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11335,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews","volume":"40 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/dmrr.70002","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/dmrr.70002","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a common and complex complication in patients with diabetes mellitus. The study of antibiotic-loaded bone cement for the treatment of infected diabetic foot is limited. We aimed to assess the efficacy of antibiotic-loaded bone cement for the treatment of infected diabetic foot.

Methods

The MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Knowledge databases were systematically searched up to May 2023 with no language restrictions. We assessed eligible studies for the efficacy of antibiotic-loaded bone cement for the treatment of infected diabetic foot. The standard mean differences (SMDs) or the risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for continuous or dichotomous data, respectively. Data were analysed using the Cochrane Collaboration's RevMan 5.0 software.

Results

Nine articles with 565 patients were analysed in our meta-analysis. The wound healing time in ABC group was significantly shorter than that in the control group (SMD = −1.64, 95% CI −2.27 to −1.02 p < 0.00001, I² = 88%). The ABC group had a significantly decreased number of debridements (SMD = −2.47, 95% CI −4.24 to −0.70, p < 0.00001, I² = 95%). The pooled data showed no significant difference (RR = 0.41, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.39, p = 0.84, I² = 0%).

Conclusion

This is the first meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of antibiotic-loaded bone cement for the treatment of infected diabetic foot. Antibiotic-loaded bone cement treatment significantly shortened the wound healing time and reduced the number of debridements without increasing the incidence of complications.

Trial Registration

PROSPERO CRD42023406017

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

抗生素骨水泥治疗糖尿病足感染的评估：系统回顾与元分析》。

背景：糖尿病足溃疡（DFU）是糖尿病患者常见且复杂的并发症。关于抗生素骨水泥治疗糖尿病足感染的研究十分有限。我们旨在评估抗生素骨水泥治疗糖尿病足感染的疗效：方法：我们对截至 2023 年 5 月的 MEDLINE、Embase、BIOSIS、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) 和 Web of Knowledge 数据库进行了系统检索，无语言限制。我们对符合条件的研究进行了评估，以了解抗生素骨水泥治疗糖尿病足感染的疗效。连续或二分数据分别计算标准平均差（SMDs）或风险比（RRs）。数据使用 Cochrane 协作组织的 RevMan 5.0 软件进行分析：我们的荟萃分析共分析了9篇文章，565名患者。ABC组的伤口愈合时间明显短于对照组（SMD = -1.64, 95% CI -2.27 to -1.02 p 2 = 88%）。ABC 组的清创次数明显减少（SMD = -2.47，95% CI -4.24 至 -0.70，P 2 = 95%）。汇总数据显示无明显差异（RR = 0.41，95% CI 0.12 至 1.39，P = 0.84，I2 = 0%）：这是首次比较抗生素骨水泥治疗糖尿病足感染疗效的荟萃分析。抗生素骨水泥治疗大大缩短了伤口愈合时间，减少了清创次数，但并没有增加并发症的发生率：试验注册：PREMCORD42023406017。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews 医学-内分泌学与代谢

CiteScore

17.20

自引率

2.50%

发文量

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews is a premier endocrinology and metabolism journal esteemed by clinicians and researchers alike. Encompassing a wide spectrum of topics including diabetes, endocrinology, metabolism, and obesity, the journal eagerly accepts submissions ranging from clinical studies to basic and translational research, as well as reviews exploring historical progress, controversial issues, and prominent opinions in the field. Join us in advancing knowledge and understanding in the realm of diabetes and metabolism.