Literature DB >> 27617934

Comparing the efficacies of alginate, foam, hydrocolloid, hydrofiber, and hydrogel dressings in the management of diabetic foot ulcers and venous leg ulcers: a systematic review and meta-analysis examining how to dress for success.

Michael Saco1, Nicole Howe, Rajiv Nathoo, Basil Cherpelis.   

Abstract

Diabetic foot ulcers and venous leg ulcers are chronic wounds frequently encountered by dermatologists. Choosing appropriate wound dressings can effectively promote wound healing and potentially reduce morbidity and financial burden experienced by patients. The objective of our systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate wound healing efficacies of synthetic active dressings in diabetic foot ulcer and venous leg ulcer management. For data collection, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and clinicaltrials.gov online databases were searched from database inception to 10 May 2015. Fixed and random effects modeling were used to calculate pooled risk ratios for complete ulcer healing from pairwise dressing comparisons. The results of our review showed moderate-quality level evidence that hydrogels were more effective in healing diabetic foot ulcers than basic wound contact dressings (RR 1.80 [95% CI, 1.27-2.56]). The other dressing comparisons showed no statistically significant differences between the interventions examined in terms of achieving complete diabetic foot ulcer healing. Non-adherent dressings were more cost-effective than hydrofiber dressings for diabetic foot ulcers in terms of mean total cost per patient of the dressings themselves. All venous leg ulcer pairwise dressing comparisons showed equivalent dressing efficacies in terms of promoting complete ulcer healing. Overall, most synthetic active dressings and traditional wound dressings are equally efficacious in treating diabetic foot ulcers and venous leg ulcers. For treating diabetic foot ulcers, hydrogels are more efficacious than basic wound contact dressings, and non-adherent dressings are more cost-effective than hydrofiber dressings. Ultimately, dressing choice should be tailored to the wound and the patient.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27617934

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dermatol Online J        ISSN: 1087-2108


  5 in total

1.  Physical properties of hydrogel wound dressing and its use in low-level laser therapy (LLLT).

Authors:  K Wachal; E Stachowska; K Korpuścińska; B Nowak; Z Krasiński
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2018-04-02       Impact factor: 3.161

Review 2.  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

3.  Effects of Azelnidipine-Carboxymethylcellulose Gel on Healing of Full-Thickness Skin Wounds in Streptozotocin Induced Diabetic Rats.

Authors:  Mohammad Yasin Karami; Nasrin Mansournia; Neda Bagherian; Alireza Makarem; Nader MoeinVaziri; Sahar Borna; Amir Hossein Pourdavood; Iman Shamohammadi
Journal:  Vet Med (Auckl)       Date:  2019-12-17

4.  Wound Dressing Selection Is Critical to Enhance Platelet-Rich Fibrin Activities in Wound Care.

Authors:  Cristina Del Amo; Arantza Perez-Valle; Elena Perez-Zabala; Karmele Perez-Del-Pecho; Ainara Larrazabal; Andima Basterretxea; Paola Bully; Isabel Andia
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-01-17       Impact factor: 5.923

Review 5.  Selection of Appropriate Wound Dressing for Various Wounds.

Authors:  Chenyu Shi; Chenyu Wang; He Liu; Qiuju Li; Ronghang Li; Yan Zhang; Yuzhe Liu; Ying Shao; Jincheng Wang
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2020-03-19
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.