Aim: The aim of this study to compare the topical sucralfate and ordinary saline for diabetic ulcer dressing.Materials and method: Of the 100 patients, 50 received traditional normal saline dressings and the other 50 received sucralfate dressings. Both groups used pressure relief from the affected area but no antibiotics. Both groups received once-daily dressings. The patients were followed up on a daily basis for 3 weeks in both groups. Results: Thirty percent of the patients had ulcers on the dorsal surface of the forefoot, and ten percent had ulcers on the medial malleoli. In conventional normal saline dressings, about 50% of the patients had ulcers on the plantar aspect and about 10% on the lateral malleoli, and 28% of the patients had ulcers on the dorsal surface of the forefoot and 20% had ulcers on the medial malleoli. In Sucralfate dressing, approximately 46% of the plantar aspect and approximately 6% of the lateral malleoli are affected. Dressing with sucralfate. In the Sucralfate dressing, 88% of patients had a negative culture. whereas 98% of patients receiving conventional normal saline dressings had a positive culture. Diabetic ulcers in the Sucralfate dressing had a better mean percentage reduction of area of 43.59±7.81 when compared to the Conventional normal saline dressings, which had a mean percentage reduction of area of 21.85±5.84 when the two groups were studied using an independent sample. The T-test was found to be statistically significant (P 0.0001). Conclusion: Sucralfate dressing is an efficient modality for facilitating wound area reduction in diabetic foot ulcer patients, and it can be used as an adjunct to conventional treatment (conventional dressings and debridement) for faster and better healing of diabetic ulcers. The wounds in the sucralfate dressing group contracted more than the wounds in the ordinary saline group