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

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q2 CELL BIOLOGY
Tyler L Coye, Miguel Bargas Ochoa, Alejandro Zulbaran-Rojas, Bernado Martinez Leal, Abderrahman Quattas, Arthur Tarricone, Jayer Chung, Bijan Najafi, Lawrence A Lavery
{"title":"Healing of diabetic neuropathic foot ulcers receiving standard treatment in randomised controlled trials: A random effects meta-analysis.","authors":"Tyler L Coye, Miguel Bargas Ochoa, Alejandro Zulbaran-Rojas, Bernado Martinez Leal, Abderrahman Quattas, Arthur Tarricone, Jayer Chung, Bijan Najafi, Lawrence A Lavery","doi":"10.1111/wrr.13237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>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 I<sup>2</sup> 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.</p>","PeriodicalId":23864,"journal":{"name":"Wound Repair and Regeneration","volume":"33 1","pages":"e13237"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wound Repair and Regeneration","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/wrr.13237","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CELL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Wound Repair and Regeneration
Wound Repair and Regeneration 医学-皮肤病学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.40%
发文量
71
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Wound Repair and Regeneration provides extensive international coverage of cellular and molecular biology, connective tissue, and biological mediator studies in the field of tissue repair and regeneration and serves a diverse audience of surgeons, plastic surgeons, dermatologists, biochemists, cell biologists, and others. Wound Repair and Regeneration is the official journal of The Wound Healing Society, The European Tissue Repair Society, The Japanese Society for Wound Healing, and The Australian Wound Management Association.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信