Literature DB >> 16620261

Systematic review of methods to diagnose infection in foot ulcers in diabetes.

S O'Meara1, E A Nelson, S Golder, J E Dalton, D Craig, C Iglesias.   

Abstract

AIM: To undertake a systematic review of the diagnostic performance of clinical examination, sample acquisition and sample analysis in infected foot ulcers in diabetes.
METHODS: Nineteen electronic databases plus other sources were searched. To be included, studies had to fulfil the following criteria: (i) compare a method of clinical assessment, sample collection or sample analysis with a reference standard; (ii) recruit diabetic individuals with foot ulcers; (ii) present 2 x 2 diagnostic data. Studies were critically appraised using a 12-item checklist.
RESULTS: Three eligible studies were identified, one each on clinical examination, sample collection and sample analysis. For all three, study groups were heterogeneous with respect to wound type and a small proportion of participants had foot ulcers due to diabetes. No studies identified an optimum reference standard. Other methodological problems included non-blind interpretation of tests and the time lag between index and reference tests. Individual signs or symptoms of infection did not prove to be useful tests when assessed against punch biopsy as the reference standard. The wound swab did not perform well when assessed against tissue biopsy. Semiquantitative analysis of wound swab might be a useful alternative to quantitative analysis. The limitations of these findings and their impact on recommendations from relevant clinical guidelines are discussed.
CONCLUSION: Given the importance of this topic, it is surprising that only three eligible studies were identified. It was not possible to describe the optimal methods of diagnosing infection in diabetic patients with foot ulceration from the evidence identified in this systematic review.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16620261     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2006.01830.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabet Med        ISSN: 0742-3071            Impact factor:   4.359


  9 in total

1.  Efficacy of topically delivered moxifloxacin against wound infection by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  F Jacobsen; C Fisahn; M Sorkin; I Thiele; T Hirsch; I Stricker; T Klaassen; A Roemer; B Fugmann; L Steinstraesser
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2011-02-22       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Antibacterial efficacy of silver-impregnated polyelectrolyte multilayers immobilized on a biological dressing in a murine wound infection model.

Authors:  Kathleen M Guthrie; Ankit Agarwal; Dana S Tackes; Kevin W Johnson; Nicholas L Abbott; Christopher J Murphy; Charles J Czuprynski; Patricia R Kierski; Michael J Schurr; Jonathan F McAnulty
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  A Study on Acinetobacter baumannii and Staphylococcus aureus Strains Recovered from the Same Infection Site of a Diabetic Patient.

Authors:  Nancy Castellanos; Jun Nakanouchi; Dennis Irfan Yüzen; Sammie Fung; Jennifer S Fernandez; Claudia Barberis; Lorena Tuchscherr; Maria Soledad Ramirez
Journal:  Curr Microbiol       Date:  2019-05-03       Impact factor: 2.188

4.  Clinical signs of infection in diabetic foot ulcers with high microbial load.

Authors:  Sue E Gardner; Stephen L Hillis; Rita A Frantz
Journal:  Biol Res Nurs       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 2.522

5.  A prospective, non comparative, multicenter study to investigate the effect of cadexomer iodine on bioburden load and other wound characteristics in diabetic foot ulcers.

Authors:  Jamie A Schwartz; John C Lantis; Cynthia Gendics; Amy M Fuller; Wyatt Payne; Diane Ochs
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2012-11-09       Impact factor: 3.315

6.  Concordance in diabetic foot ulcer infection.

Authors:  E Andrea Nelson; Michael Ross Backhouse; Moninder S Bhogal; Alexandra Wright-Hughes; Benjamin A Lipsky; Jane Nixon; Sarah Brown; Janine Gray
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  [Bacteriological profile of diabetic foot and its impact on the choice of antibiotics].

Authors:  Adil Zemmouri; Mohamed Tarchouli; Abdellatif Benbouha; Tarik Lamkinsi; Mustapha Bensghir; Mostafa Elouennass; Cherqui Haimeur
Journal:  Pan Afr Med J       Date:  2015-02-17

8.  Enhanced susceptibility to infections in a diabetic wound healing model.

Authors:  Tobias Hirsch; Malte Spielmann; Baraa Zuhaili; Till Koehler; Magdalena Fossum; Hans-Ulrich Steinau; Feng Yao; Lars Steinstraesser; Andrew B Onderdonk; Elof Eriksson
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2008-02-29       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  A Comparison of Tissue versus Swab Culturing of Infected Diabetic Foot Wounds.

Authors:  Ying Huang; Ying Cao; Mengchen Zou; Xiangrong Luo; Ya Jiang; Yaoming Xue; Fang Gao
Journal:  Int J Endocrinol       Date:  2016-03-30       Impact factor: 3.257

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.