Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums, for communication between foot health professionals about podiatry and related topics.
You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members (PM), upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, earn CPD points and access many other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisments in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Ultrasound Therapy for Recalcitrant Diabetic Foot Ulcers: Results of A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled, Multicenter Study
Quote:
An estimated 15% of patients with diabetes will develop a foot ulcer sometime in their life, making them 30 to 40 times more likely to undergo amputation due to a non-healing foot ulcer than the non-diabetic population. To determine the safety and efficacy of a new, non-contact, kilohertz ultrasound therapy for the healing of recalcitrant diabetic foot ulcers — as well as to evaluate the impact on total closure and quantitative bacterial cultures and the effect on healing of various levels of sharp/surgical debridement — a randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled, multicenter study was conducted in hospital-based and private wound care clinics. Patients (55 met criteria for efficacy analysis) received standard of care, which included products that provide a moist environment, offloading diabetic shoes and socks, debridement, wound evaluation, and measurement. The “therapy” was either active 40 KHz ultrasound delivered by a saline mist or a “sham device” which delivered a saline mist without the use of ultrasound. After 12 weeks of care, the proportion of wounds healed (defined as complete epithelialization without drainage) in the active ultrasound therapy device group was significantly higher than that in the sham control group (40.7% versus 14.3%, P = 0.0366, Fisher’s exact test). The ultrasound treatment was easy to use and no difference in the number and type of adverse events between the two treatment groups was noted. Of interest, wounds were debrided at baseline followed by a quantitative culture biopsy. The results of these cultures demonstrated a significant bioburden (>105) in the majority of cases, despite a lack of clinical signs of infection. Compared to control, this therapeutic modality was found to increase the healing rate of recalcitrant, diabetic foot ulcers.
Re: Ultrasound Therapy for Recalcitrant Diabetic Foot Ulcers
Expedited Wound Healing with Noncontact, Low-Frequency Ultrasound Therapy in Chronic Wounds: A Retrospective Analysis.
Kavros SJ, Liedl DA, Boon AJ, Miller JL, Hobbs JA, Andrews KL. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2008 Sep;21(9):416-423.
Quote:
OBJECTIVE:: To evaluate the clinical role of noncontact, low-frequency ultrasound therapy (MIST Therapy System; Celleration, Eden Prairie, Minnesota) in the treatment of chronic lower-extremity wounds.
DESIGN:: A retrospective observational study. SETTING:: A multidisciplinary, vascular wound-healing clinic. PATIENTS:: One hundred sixty-three patients who received MIST Therapy plus standard of care (treatment group) and 47 patients who received the standard of care alone (control group). INTERVENTIONS:: All wounds in the control and treatment groups received the standard of wound care and were followed for 6 months. In the treatment group, MIST Therapy was administered to wounds 3 times per week for 90 days or until healed.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:: Proportion of wounds healed and wound volume reduction. Rate of healing was also quantified using 1-way analysis of variance to determine the slope of the regression line from starting volume to ending volume, where a steeper slope indicates a faster healing rate. Outcomes were evaluated in all wounds and etiology-specific subgroups.
MAIN RESULTS:: A significantly greater percentage of wounds treated with MIST Therapy and standard of care healed as compared with those treated with the standard of care alone (53% vs 32%; P = 0.009). The slope of the regression line in the MIST arm (1.4) was steeper than the slope in the control arm (0.22; P = .002), indicating a faster rate of healing in the MIST-treated wounds.
CONCLUSION:: The rate of healing and complete closure of chronic wounds in patients improved significantly when MIST Therapy was combined with standard wound care.
Ultrasound Therapy for Recalcitrant Diabetic Foot Ulcers
Linear Mode
