Is surgical debridement necessary in the diabetic foot treated with photodynamic therapy?

Q1 Health Professions
Diabetic Foot & Ankle Pub Date : 2017-09-19 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.1080/2000625X.2017.1373552
João Paulo Tardivo, Rodrigo Serrano, Lívia Maria Zimmermann, Leandro Luongo Matos, Mauricio S Baptista, Maria Aparecida Silva Pinhal, Álvaro N Atallah
{"title":"Is surgical debridement necessary in the diabetic foot treated with photodynamic therapy?","authors":"João Paulo Tardivo,&nbsp;Rodrigo Serrano,&nbsp;Lívia Maria Zimmermann,&nbsp;Leandro Luongo Matos,&nbsp;Mauricio S Baptista,&nbsp;Maria Aparecida Silva Pinhal,&nbsp;Álvaro N Atallah","doi":"10.1080/2000625X.2017.1373552","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Diabetic patients are susceptible to developing foot ulcers with serious complications such as osteomyelitis and amputations. Treatment approaches are still empirical and the benefit of usual procedures such as surgical debridement has not been properly evaluated. Photodynamic Therapy (PDT) is a non-invasive and highly efficient method for the treatment of the diabetic foot, being able to eradicate the infection and to stimulate healing, decreasing considerably the amputation risk. In the day-to-day practice of our service, we have been faced with the question whether debridement is necessary before PDT. In here, we designed a study to answer that question. <b>Methods</b>: Patients were divided in two groups: In one of the groups (n = 17), debridement was performed before PDT and in the other (n = 40) only PDT treatment was performed. PDT sessions were performed once a week in all patients until healing was achieved, as indicated by visual inspection as well as by radiographic and laboratory exams. At the start of the study, the two groups had no statistical differences concerning their clinical features: average age, gender, insulin use, diabetes mellitus onset time and previous amputations. <b>Results</b>: PDT was effective in the treatment of 100% of the patients showing no relapses after one year of follow up. The group submitted to PDT without previous debridement had a statistically significant (p = 0.036, Mann-Whitney) shorter cure time (29 days, ~27%). <b>Conclusion</b>: Our data indicates that debridement is not necessary in the treatment of diabetic foot in patients that have enough peripheral arterial perfusion. In addition, we reproduced previous studies confirming that PDT is an efficient, safe, simple and affordable treatment method for the diabetic foot.</p>","PeriodicalId":45385,"journal":{"name":"Diabetic Foot & Ankle","volume":"8 1","pages":"1373552"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/2000625X.2017.1373552","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetic Foot & Ankle","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2000625X.2017.1373552","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Background: Diabetic patients are susceptible to developing foot ulcers with serious complications such as osteomyelitis and amputations. Treatment approaches are still empirical and the benefit of usual procedures such as surgical debridement has not been properly evaluated. Photodynamic Therapy (PDT) is a non-invasive and highly efficient method for the treatment of the diabetic foot, being able to eradicate the infection and to stimulate healing, decreasing considerably the amputation risk. In the day-to-day practice of our service, we have been faced with the question whether debridement is necessary before PDT. In here, we designed a study to answer that question. Methods: Patients were divided in two groups: In one of the groups (n = 17), debridement was performed before PDT and in the other (n = 40) only PDT treatment was performed. PDT sessions were performed once a week in all patients until healing was achieved, as indicated by visual inspection as well as by radiographic and laboratory exams. At the start of the study, the two groups had no statistical differences concerning their clinical features: average age, gender, insulin use, diabetes mellitus onset time and previous amputations. Results: PDT was effective in the treatment of 100% of the patients showing no relapses after one year of follow up. The group submitted to PDT without previous debridement had a statistically significant (p = 0.036, Mann-Whitney) shorter cure time (29 days, ~27%). Conclusion: Our data indicates that debridement is not necessary in the treatment of diabetic foot in patients that have enough peripheral arterial perfusion. In addition, we reproduced previous studies confirming that PDT is an efficient, safe, simple and affordable treatment method for the diabetic foot.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

光动力疗法治疗糖尿病足是否需要手术清创?
背景:糖尿病患者易发生足部溃疡并伴有严重并发症,如骨髓炎和截肢。治疗方法仍然是经验性的,手术清创等常规方法的益处尚未得到适当的评估。光动力疗法(PDT)是治疗糖尿病足的一种非侵入性和高效的方法,能够根除感染并促进愈合,大大降低截肢风险。在我们服务的日常实践中,我们一直面临着PDT前是否有必要清创的问题。在这里,我们设计了一个研究来回答这个问题。方法:将患者分为两组:一组(n = 17)在PDT前进行清创,另一组(n = 40)只进行PDT治疗。所有患者每周进行一次PDT治疗,直到愈合,如目视检查、放射检查和实验室检查所示。研究开始时,两组患者的临床特征:平均年龄、性别、胰岛素使用情况、糖尿病发病时间、截肢史等均无统计学差异。结果:经1年随访,PDT治疗有效率100%,无复发。先前未清创的PDT组的治愈时间较短(29天,约27%),具有统计学意义(p = 0.036, Mann-Whitney)。结论:我们的数据表明,对于周围动脉灌注充足的糖尿病足患者,清创治疗是不必要的。此外,我们复制了以往的研究,证实了PDT是一种有效、安全、简单、负担得起的治疗糖尿病足的方法。
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
Diabetic Foot & Ankle
Diabetic Foot & Ankle ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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