{"title":"Evaluating the effectiveness of ultrasound-assisted wound debridement in managing diabetic foot ulcers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Rui Yang, Geng Chen, Qing-Yun Pan, Yao Yao, Yan-Fen Li, Hai-Ting Chen, Chang-Jiang Lei, Xia Liang","doi":"10.4239/wjd.v16.i2.97077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) present a significant clinical challenge due to their high prevalence and profound impact on morbidity. Ultrasound-assisted wound debridement (UAWD) has emerged as a potential therapeutic modality to improve healing outcomes in DFU management.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy of UAWD in treating DFUs on wound closure rates, treatment duration, and quality of life outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines, systematically searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library with no date restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of UAWD in DFU treatment were included. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers, with discrepancies resolved through consensus or third-party consultation. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool. <i>χ</i> <sup>2</sup> and <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup> statistics assessed heterogeneity, informing the use of fixed or random-effects models for meta-analysis, supplemented by sensitivity analysis and publication bias assessment through funnel plots and Egger's test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 1255 articles, seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The studies demonstrated that UAWD significantly reduced DFU healing time (standardized mean difference = -0.78, 95%CI: -0.97 to -0.60, <i>P</i> < 0.001) and increased healing rates (odds ratio = 9.96, 95%CI: 5.99 to 16.56, <i>P</i> < 0.001) compared to standard care. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of these results, and no significant publication bias was detected.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>UAWD is a promising adjunctive treatment for DFUs, significantly reducing healing times and increasing healing rates. These findings advocate for the integration of UAWD into standard DFU care protocols.</p>","PeriodicalId":48607,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Diabetes","volume":"16 2","pages":"97077"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11718489/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Diabetes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4239/wjd.v16.i2.97077","RegionNum":3,"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 ulcers (DFUs) present a significant clinical challenge due to their high prevalence and profound impact on morbidity. Ultrasound-assisted wound debridement (UAWD) has emerged as a potential therapeutic modality to improve healing outcomes in DFU management.
Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of UAWD in treating DFUs on wound closure rates, treatment duration, and quality of life outcomes.
Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines, systematically searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library with no date restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of UAWD in DFU treatment were included. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers, with discrepancies resolved through consensus or third-party consultation. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool. χ2 and I2 statistics assessed heterogeneity, informing the use of fixed or random-effects models for meta-analysis, supplemented by sensitivity analysis and publication bias assessment through funnel plots and Egger's test.
Results: From 1255 articles, seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The studies demonstrated that UAWD significantly reduced DFU healing time (standardized mean difference = -0.78, 95%CI: -0.97 to -0.60, P < 0.001) and increased healing rates (odds ratio = 9.96, 95%CI: 5.99 to 16.56, P < 0.001) compared to standard care. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of these results, and no significant publication bias was detected.
Conclusion: UAWD is a promising adjunctive treatment for DFUs, significantly reducing healing times and increasing healing rates. These findings advocate for the integration of UAWD into standard DFU care protocols.
期刊介绍:
The WJD is a high-quality, peer reviewed, open-access journal. The primary task of WJD is to rapidly publish high-quality original articles, reviews, editorials, and case reports in the field of diabetes. In order to promote productive academic communication, the peer review process for the WJD is transparent; to this end, all published manuscripts are accompanied by the anonymized reviewers’ comments as well as the authors’ responses. The primary aims of the WJD are to improve diagnostic, therapeutic and preventive modalities and the skills of clinicians and to guide clinical practice in diabetes. Scope: Diabetes Complications, Experimental Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Diabetes, Gestational, Diabetic Angiopathies, Diabetic Cardiomyopathies, Diabetic Coma, Diabetic Ketoacidosis, Diabetic Nephropathies, Diabetic Neuropathies, Donohue Syndrome, Fetal Macrosomia, and Prediabetic State.