Individuals with diabetes mellitus are at an increased risk of developing a diabetic foot ulcer (DFU). This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of Integra Dermal Regeneration Template (IDRT) for the treatment of nonhealing DFUs. The Foot Ulcer New Dermal Replacement Study was a multicenter, randomized, controlled, parallel group clinical trial conducted under an Investigational Device Exemption. Thirty-two sites enrolled and randomized 307 subjects with at least one DFU. Consented patients were entered into the 14-day run-in phase where they were treated with the standard of care (0.9% sodium chloride gel) plus a secondary dressing and an offloading/protective device. Patients with less than 30% reepithelialization of the study ulcer after the run-in phase were randomized into the treatment phase. The subjects were randomized to the control treatment group (0.9% sodium chloride gel; n 5 153) or the active treatment group (IDRT, n 5 154). The treatment phase was 16 weeks or until confirmation of complete wound closure (100% reepithelialization of the wound surface), whichever occurred first. Following the treatment phase, all subjects were followed for 12 weeks. Complete DFU closure during the treatment phase was significantly greater with IDRT treatment (51%) than control treatment (32%; p 5 0.001) at sixteen weeks. The median time to complete DFU closure was 43 days for IDRT subjects and 78 days for control subjects in wounds that healed. The rate of wound size reduction was 7.2% per week for IDRT subjects vs. 4.8% per week for control subjects (p 5 0.012). For the treatment of chronic DFUs, IDRT treatment decreased the time to complete wound closure, increased the rate of wound closure, improved components of quality of life and had less adverse events compared with the standard of care treatment. IDRT could greatly enhance the treatment of nonhealing DFUs.Currently, there are 387 million individuals worldwide living with diabetes mellitus including 29 million Americans. Diabetics have up to a 25% lifetime risk of developing a diabetic foot ulcer (DFU).1-3 Once an ulcer develops, healing is often slow and challenging even for those with proper treatment. A meta-analysis of studies involving the standard of care for DFUs demonstrated only a 24% healing rate at 12 weeks. 4 A high proportion of DFUs become infected (61%) 5 and approximately 15% of DFUs result in lower extremity amputation. 6,7 However, an estimated 44-85% of these amputations can be prevented with improved foot care programs.8 DFUs are responsible for more hospitalizations than any other complication of diabetes, ranging in costs from $9 to $13 billion in addition to the costs associated with diabetes itself.9 Substantial morbidity rates also adversely impact the physical and mental quality of life of those afflicted.10 Studies using quality of life questionnaires showed that patients with a nonhealing DFU report significantly lower scores compared with diabetic patients without DFUs.11,12 As a result of the complexity to treat these ...
OBJECTIVETopical oxygen has been used for the treatment of chronic wounds for more than 50 years. Its effectiveness remains disputed due to the limited number of robust high-quality investigations. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of multimodality cyclical pressure Topical Wound Oxygen (TWO2) home care therapy in healing refractory diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) that had failed to heal with standard of care (SOC) alone. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSPatients with diabetes and chronic DFUs were randomized (double-blind) to either active TWO2 therapy or sham control therapydboth in addition to optimal SOC. The primary outcome was the percentage of ulcers in each group achieving 100% healing at 12 weeks. A group sequential design was used for the study with three predetermined analyses and hard stopping rules once 73, 146, and ultimately 220 patients completed the 12-week treatment phase. RESULTSAt the first analysis point, the active TWO2 arm was found to be superior to the sham arm, with a closure rate of 41.7% compared with 13.5%. This difference in outcome produced an odds ratio (OR) of 4.57 (97.8% CI 1.19, 17.57), P 5 0.010. After adjustment for University of Texas Classification (UTC) ulcer grade, the OR increased to 6.00 (97.8% CI 1.44, 24.93), P 5 0.004. Cox proportional hazards modeling, also after adjustment for UTC grade, demonstrated >4.5 times the likelihood to heal DFUs over 12 weeks compared with the sham arm with a hazard ratio of 4.66 (97.8% CI 1.36, 15.98), P 5 0.004. At 12 months postenrollment, 56% of active arm ulcers were closed compared with 27% of the sham arm ulcers (P 5 0.013). CONCLUSIONSThis sham-controlled, double-blind randomized controlled trial demonstrates that, at both 12 weeks and 12 months, adjunctive cyclical pressurized TWO2 therapy was superior in healing chronic DFUs compared with optimal SOC alone.Clinical trial reg. no. NCT02326337, clinicaltrials .gov. This article contains Supplementary Data online at https://care.diabetesjournals.org/lookup/suppl/
AimsAmong people with diabetes, 10–25% will experience a foot ulcer. Research has shown that supplementation with arginine, glutamine and β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate may improve wound repair. This study tested whether such supplementation would improve healing of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes.MethodsAlong with standard of care, 270 subjects received, in a double-blinded fashion, (twice per day) either arginine, glutamine and β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate or a control drink for 16 weeks. The proportion of subjects with total wound closure and time to complete healing was assessed. In a post-hoc analysis, the interaction of serum albumin or limb perfusion, as measured by ankle–brachial index, and supplementation on healing was investigated.ResultsOverall, there were no group differences in wound closure or time to wound healing at week 16. However, in subjects with an albumin level of ≤ 40 g/l and/or an ankle–brachial index of < 1.0, a significantly greater proportion of subjects in the arginine, glutamine and β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate group healed at week 16 compared with control subjects (P = 0.03 and 0.008, respectively). Those with low albumin or decreased limb perfusion in the supplementation group were 1.70 (95% CI 1.04–2.79) and 1.66 (95% CI 1.15–2.38) times more likely to heal.ConclusionsWhile no differences in healing were identified with supplementation in non-ischaemic patients or those with normal albumin, addition of arginine, glutamine and β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate as an adjunct to standard of care may improve healing of diabetic foot ulcers in patients with risk of poor limb perfusion and/or low albumin levels. Further investigation involving arginine, glutamine and β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate in these high-risk subgroups might prove clinically valuable.
We assessed the safety and efficacy of Formulated Collagen Gel (FCG) alone and with Ad5PDGF-B (GAM501) compared with Standard of Care (SOC) in patients with 1.5–10.0 cm2 chronic diabetic neuropathic foot ulcers that healed <30% during Run-in. Wound size was assessed by planimetry of acetate tracings and photographs in 124 patients. Comparison of data sets revealed that acetate tracings frequently overestimated areas at some sites. For per-protocol analysis, 113 patients qualified using acetate tracings but only 82 qualified using photographs. Prior animal studies suggested that collagen alone would have little effect on healing and would serve as a negative control. Surprisingly trends for increased incidence of complete closure were observed for both GAM501 (41%) and FCG (45%) vs. Standard of Care (31%). By photographic data, Standard of Care had no significant effect on change in wound radius (mm/week) from during Run-in to Week 1 (−0.06±0.32 to 0.78±1.53, p=ns) but both FCG (−0.08±0.61 to 1.97±1.77, p<0.002) and GAM501 (−0.02±0.58 to 1.46±1.37, p<0.002) significantly increased healing rates that gradually declined over subsequent weeks. Both GAM501 and FCG appeared to be safe and well tolerated, and alternate dosing schedules hold promise to improve overall complete wound closure in adequately powered trials.
Randomized controlled clinical trials, the gold standard to determine treatment efficacy against control, have demonstrated advantages of skin substitutes for the treatment of chronic diabetic foot ulcers in comparison to standard of care. However, randomized controlled clinical trials comparing efficacy between two or more skin substitutes are very limited. With growing numbers of new skin substitutes, such studies are essential for treatment and policy-making decisions by wound care providers and payers. In this study, we analyzed clinical outcomes and product cost between a viable cryopreserved placental membrane (vCPM) and a human fibroblast-derived dermal substitute (hFDS) for the treatment of chronic diabetic foot ulcers in a prospective, multicenter, single-blind study. The outcomes of 62 patients were analyzed: 31 patients in the vCPM treatment group and 31 patients in the hFDS treatment group. Utilizing a non-inferiority trial design and the established treatment regimen of 8 applications for hFDS, we demonstrated that vCPM was not inferior to hFDS for the proportion of patients achieving complete wound closure (9.68, 90% CI: [10.67, 28.94]). However, preliminary findings show that vCPM may have better outcomes for wounds ≤ 5 cm : 81.3% (13/16) of wounds in the vCPM group vs. 37.5% (6/16) of wounds in the hFDS group reached complete closure at the end of treatment (p = 0.0118). A preliminary product cost analysis for wounds ≤ 5 cm may show significant savings for patients treated with vCPM. Average per-patient costs during the course of treatment were $3,846 and $7,968 (p < 0.0001) for vCPM and hFDS patients, respectively. These results may be used as guidance to wound care providers and payers.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.