Literature DB >> 24145042

Clinical and economic assessment of diabetic foot ulcer debridement with collagenase: results of a randomized controlled study.

Arthur Tallis1, Travis A Motley, Robert P Wunderlich, Jaime E Dickerson, Curtis Waycaster, Herbert B Slade.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite significant advances, the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) remains a major therapeutic challenge for clinicians, surgeons, and other health care professionals. There is an urgent need for new strategies with clinically effective interventions to treat DFUs to reduce the burden of care in an efficient and cost-effective way.
OBJECTIVE: This randomized trial evaluated and compared the clinical effectiveness, tolerability, and costs of clostridial collagenase ointment (CCO) debridement to that of debridement using saline moistened gauze (SMG) and selective sharp debridement for the treatment of DFUs.
METHODS: Randomized, controlled, parallel group, multicenter, open-label, 12-week study of 48 patients with neuropathic DFUs randomized to 4 weeks of treatment with either CCO or SMG after baseline surgical debridement. The primary end point was the condition of the ulcer bed at the end of treatment as measured using a standardized wound assessment tool. Secondary end points were the percentage of reduction in wound area and therapeutic response rates. Adverse events were monitored for the tolerability analysis. In addition, a comparative cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the perspective of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services as a payer.
RESULTS: Both the CCO and SMG groups had significantly improved wound assessment scores after 4 weeks of treatment (CCO, -2.5, P = 0.007; SMG, -3.4, P = 0.006). Only CCO treatment resulted in a statistically significant decrease from baseline in the mean wound area at the end of treatment (P = 0.0164) and at the end of follow-up (P = 0.012). In addition, the CCO group exhibited a significantly better response rate at the end of follow-up compared with the SMG group (0.92 vs 0.75, P < 0.05). Reported adverse events were similar between the 2 treatment groups. None of the reported adverse events were considered to be related to treatment. The economic analysis indicated that the direct mean costs per responder in the physician office setting of care were $832 versus $1042 for the CCO group versus the SMG group, whereas the direct mean costs per responder in the hospital outpatient department setting were $1607 versus $1980.
CONCLUSIONS: CCO treatment provides equivalent debridement of DFUs similar to SMG while fostering better progress toward healing as measured by decreasing wound area over time and improved response rates at the end of follow-up. In addition, CCO yields a more favorable cost-effectiveness ratio in both the physician office and hospital outpatient department settings of care. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01056198.
© 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Medicare and Medicaid; collagenase; cost minimization; debridement; diabetes; health economics; resource utilization and costs; saline moistened gauze; ulcer healing

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24145042     DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2013.09.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Ther        ISSN: 0149-2918            Impact factor:   3.393


  18 in total

Review 1.  Enzymatic debridement with collagenase in wounds and ulcers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jérôme Patry; Virginie Blanchette
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 3.315

2.  Study on the Effect of the Five-in-One Comprehensive Limb Salvage Technologies of Treating Severe Diabetic Foot.

Authors:  Yiling Liu; Yan Shi; Junyou Zhu; XiaoDong Chen; RongHua Yang; Bin Shu; Ziheng Zhou; Jian Liu; Ri-Qiang Wu; Julin Xie
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 3.  Literature review on the management of diabetic foot ulcer.

Authors:  Leila Yazdanpanah; Morteza Nasiri; Sara Adarvishi
Journal:  World J Diabetes       Date:  2015-02-15

Review 4.  Update on management of diabetic foot ulcers.

Authors:  Estelle Everett; Nestoras Mathioudakis
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 5.691

5.  Topical application of Acheflan on rat skin injury accelerates wound healing: a histopathological, immunohistochemical and biochemical study.

Authors:  Jamila Alessandra Perini; Thais Angeli-Gamba; Jessica Alessandra-Perini; Luiz Claudio Ferreira; Luiz Eurico Nasciutti; Daniel Escorsim Machado
Journal:  BMC Complement Altern Med       Date:  2015-06-30       Impact factor: 3.659

Review 6.  Managing Diabetic Foot Ulcers: Pharmacotherapy for Wound Healing.

Authors:  Danielle Dixon; Michael Edmonds
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 9.546

7.  Cost-effectiveness of clostridial collagenase ointment on wound closure in patients with diabetic foot ulcers: economic analysis of results from a multicenter, randomized, open-label trial.

Authors:  Travis A Motley; Adrienne M Gilligan; Darrell L Lange; Curtis R Waycaster; Jaime E Dickerson
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2015-02-28       Impact factor: 2.303

8.  Identification and Characterization of Novel Matrix-Derived Bioactive Peptides: A Role for Collagenase from Santyl® Ointment in Post-Debridement Wound Healing?

Authors:  Anthony R Sheets; Tatiana N Demidova-Rice; Lei Shi; Vincent Ronfard; Komel V Grover; Ira M Herman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-07-26       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Physical Therapy in Wound Care: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Authors:  Kehua Zhou; Kenneth Krug; Michael S Brogan
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.817

10.  Matrix- and plasma-derived peptides promote tissue-specific injury responses and wound healing in diabetic swine.

Authors:  Anthony R Sheets; Conner J Massey; Stephen M Cronk; Mark D Iafrati; Ira M Herman
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2016-07-02       Impact factor: 5.531

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.