OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the association between hemoglobin A1c (A1C) and wound outcomes in patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of an ongoing prospective, clinic-based study of patients with DFUs treated at an academic institution during a 4.7-year period. Data from 270 participants and 584 wounds were included in the analysis. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the incidence of wound healing at any follow-up time in relation to categories of baseline A1C and the incidence of long-term (≥90 days) wound healing in relation to tertiles of nadir A1C change and mean A1C change from baseline, adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: Baseline A1C was not associated with wound healing in univariate or fully adjusted models. Compared with a nadir A1C change from baseline of -0.29 to 0.0 (tertile 2), a nadir A1C change of 0.09 to 2.4 (tertile 3) was positively associated with long-term wound healing in the subset of participants with baseline A1C <7.5% (hazard ratio [HR] 2.07; 95% CI 1.08-4.00), but no association with wound healing was seen with the mean A1C change from baseline in this group. Neither nadir A1C change nor mean A1C change were associated with long-term wound healing in participants with baseline A1C ≥7.5%. CONCLUSIONS: There does not appear to be a clinically meaningful association between baseline or prospective A1C and wound healing in patients with DFUs. The paradoxical finding of accelerated wound healing and increase in A1C in participants with better baseline glycemic control requires confirmation in further studies.
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the association between hemoglobin A1c (A1C) and wound outcomes in patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of an ongoing prospective, clinic-based study of patients with DFUs treated at an academic institution during a 4.7-year period. Data from 270 participants and 584 wounds were included in the analysis. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the incidence of wound healing at any follow-up time in relation to categories of baseline A1C and the incidence of long-term (≥90 days) wound healing in relation to tertiles of nadir A1C change and mean A1C change from baseline, adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: Baseline A1C was not associated with wound healing in univariate or fully adjusted models. Compared with a nadir A1C change from baseline of -0.29 to 0.0 (tertile 2), a nadir A1C change of 0.09 to 2.4 (tertile 3) was positively associated with long-term wound healing in the subset of participants with baseline A1C <7.5% (hazard ratio [HR] 2.07; 95% CI 1.08-4.00), but no association with wound healing was seen with the mean A1C change from baseline in this group. Neither nadir A1C change nor mean A1C change were associated with long-term wound healing in participants with baseline A1C ≥7.5%. CONCLUSIONS: There does not appear to be a clinically meaningful association between baseline or prospective A1C and wound healing in patients with DFUs. The paradoxical finding of accelerated wound healing and increase in A1C in participants with better baseline glycemic control requires confirmation in further studies.
Authors: Kristy Pickwell; Volkert Siersma; Marleen Kars; Jan Apelqvist; Karel Bakker; Michael Edmonds; Per Holstein; Alexandra Jirkovská; Edward Jude; Didac Mauricio; Alberto Piaggesi; Gunnel Ragnarson Tennvall; Heinrich Reike; Maximilian Spraul; Luigi Uccioli; Vilma Urbancic; Kristien van Acker; Jeff van Baal; Nicolaas Schaper Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2015-02-09 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Thanh Dinh; Francesco Tecilazich; Antonios Kafanas; John Doupis; Charalambos Gnardellis; Ermelindo Leal; Ana Tellechea; Leena Pradhan; Thomas E Lyons; John M Giurini; Aristidis Veves Journal: Diabetes Date: 2012-06-11 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Andrea L Christman; Elizabeth Selvin; David J Margolis; Gerald S Lazarus; Luis A Garza Journal: J Invest Dermatol Date: 2011-06-23 Impact factor: 8.551
Authors: Kyrstin L Lane; Mohammed S Abusamaan; Betiel Fesseha Voss; Emilia G Thurber; Noora Al-Hajri; Shraddha Gopakumar; Jimmy T Le; Sharoon Gill; Jaime Blanck; Laura Prichett; Caitlin W Hicks; Ronald L Sherman; Christopher J Abularrage; Nestoras N Mathioudakis Journal: J Diabetes Complications Date: 2020-05-22 Impact factor: 2.852
Authors: S Borys; J Hohendorff; T Koblik; P Witek; A H Ludwig-Slomczynska; C Frankfurter; B Kiec-Wilk; M T Malecki Journal: Endocrine Date: 2018-08-11 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: Alexander W W Langford-Smith; Ahmad Hasan; Ria Weston; Nicola Edwards; Alan M Jones; Andrew J M Boulton; Frank L Bowling; S Tawqeer Rashid; Fiona L Wilkinson; M Yvonne Alexander Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-02-19 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Jinnie J Rhee; Yuanchao Zheng; Sai Liu; Maria E Montez-Rath; Richard J Hamill; Julie H Ishida; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer Journal: Kidney Int Rep Date: 2020-04-29
Authors: G Rümenapf; S Morbach; U Rother; C Uhl; H Görtz; D Böckler; C A Behrendt; D Hochlenert; G Engels; A Hohneck; M Sigl Journal: Chirurg Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 0.955