Joondalup Health Campus, Ramsay Healthcare Australia, Joondalup, Western Australia, Australia.
Faculty of Health, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2024 Mar;40(3):e3786. doi: 10.1002/dmrr.3786.
It is critical that interventions used to enhance the healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes are backed by high-quality evidence and cost-effectiveness. In previous years, the systematic review accompanying guidelines published by the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot performed 4-yearly updates of previous searches, including trials of prospective, cross-sectional and case-control design.
Due to a need to re-evaluate older studies against newer standards of reporting and assessment of risk of bias, we performed a whole new search from conception, but limiting studies to randomised control trials only.
For this systematic review, we searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases for published studies on randomised control trials of interventions to enhance healing of diabetes-related foot ulcers. We only included trials comparing interventions to standard of care. Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion and assessed relevant outcomes as well as methodological quality.
The literature search identified 22,250 articles, of which 262 were selected for full text review across 10 categories of interventions. Overall, the certainty of evidence for a majority of wound healing interventions was low or very low, with moderate evidence existing for two interventions (sucrose-octasulfate and leucocyte, platelet and fibrin patch) and low quality evidence for a further four (hyperbaric oxygen, topical oxygen, placental derived products and negative pressure wound therapy). The majority of interventions had insufficient evidence.
Overall, the evidence to support any other intervention to enhance wound healing is lacking and further high-quality randomised control trials are encouraged.
用于增强糖尿病慢性足部溃疡愈合的干预措施必须有高质量的证据和成本效益支持,这一点至关重要。在过去几年中,国际糖尿病足工作组发布的指南所伴随的系统评价每四年更新一次以前的搜索结果,包括前瞻性、横断面和病例对照设计的试验。
由于需要根据报告和评估偏倚风险的新标准重新评估较旧的研究,我们从头开始进行了全新的搜索,但仅将研究限制在随机对照试验中。
为了进行这项系统评价,我们在 PubMed、Scopus 和 Web of Science 数据库中搜索了关于增强糖尿病相关足部溃疡愈合的干预措施的随机对照试验的已发表研究。我们只纳入了比较干预措施与标准护理的试验。两位独立的评审员选择纳入的文章,并评估了相关结局以及方法学质量。
文献检索确定了 22250 篇文章,其中 262 篇文章在 10 类干预措施中进行了全文审查。总体而言,大多数伤口愈合干预措施的证据确定性为低或极低,有两种干预措施(蔗糖-八硫酸盐和白细胞、血小板和纤维蛋白贴剂)有中度证据,另外四种干预措施(高压氧、局部氧、胎盘衍生产品和负压伤口治疗)有低质量证据。大多数干预措施证据不足。
总的来说,缺乏支持任何其他增强伤口愈合的干预措施的证据,鼓励开展更多高质量的随机对照试验。