Skip to main content

REVIEW article

Front. Endocrinol.
Sec. Clinical Diabetes
Volume 15 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1452192

Effects of different treatment measures on the efficacy of diabetic foot ulcers A network meta-analysis

Provisionally accepted
Hong Ouyang Hong Ouyang *Jing Yang Jing Yang Haiyan Wang Haiyan Wang Jiali Huang Jiali Huang Yifan Yin Yifan Yin
  • Chengdu Fifth People's Hospital, Chengdu, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Introduction:Through a network meta-analysis, we compared different treatment measures for patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU), assessing their impact on the healing of DFU and ranking them accordingly.Methods:Meta-analyses using pairwise and network methods were employed to compare and rank the effectiveness of different treatments for DFU.Results:Ultimately, we included 57 RCTs involving a total of 4,826 patients with DFU. When it comes to ulcer healing rates, compared to standard of care(SOC),platelet-rich plasma(PRP), hyperbaric oxygen therapy(HBOT), topical oxygen therapy(TOT), acellular dermal matrix(ADM), and stem cells(SCs) in both direct meta-analysis(DMA) and network meta-analysis(NMA) can effectively increase the complete healing rate. For Scs+PRP, a statistically significant improvement was only observed in the NMA. Moreover, when compared to the negative pressure wound therapy(NPWT) group, the PRP+NPWT group was more effective in promoting the complete healing of ulcers.In terms of promoting the reduction of ulcer area, no statistical differences were observed among various treatment measures. When it comes to ulcer healing time, both PRP and NPWT can effectively shorten the healing time compared to SOC. Furthermore, when compared to the NPWT group, the combined treatment of PRP and ultrasonic debridement(UD) with NPWT is more effective in reducing healing time. In terms of amputation rates and adverse reactions, the PRP group effectively reduced the amputation rate and adverse reactions for patients with DFU. Additionally, compared to the NPWT group, the combined treatment of PRP and UD with NPWT reduced the incidence of adverse reactions. However, no significant differences were observed among other treatment measures in terms of amputation rates and adverse reactions.The ranking results showed that the efficacy of PRP+NPWT and UD+NPWT in promoting ulcer healing, reducing ulcer area, shortening healing time, decreasing amputation rates and adverse reactions is superior to that of the alone PRP group, NPWT group, and UD group.Conclusion:Due to the particularity of the wound of DFU, the standard of care is not effective, but the new treatment scheme has a remarkable effect in many aspects. And the treatment of DFU is not a single choice, combined with a variety of methods often achieve better efficacy, and will not bring more adverse reactions.

    Keywords: Diabetic foot ulcers, Ultrasonic debridement, Negative pressure wound therapy, Stem Cells, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, Topical oxygen therapy, Platelet-Rich Plasma, Acellular dermal matrix

    Received: 20 Jun 2024; Accepted: 29 Aug 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Ouyang, Yang, Wang, Huang and Yin. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Hong Ouyang, Chengdu Fifth People's Hospital, Chengdu, China

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.