Literature DB >> 36263383

Effect of tibial cortex transverse transport in patients with recalcitrant diabetic foot ulcers: A prospective multicenter cohort study.

Yan Chen1, Xiaofang Ding2, Yueliang Zhu3, Zhongwei Jia4, Yong Qi5, Mingyong Chen6, Jili Lu7, Xiaocong Kuang8, Jia Zhou9, Yongfeng Su1, Yongxin Zhao1, William Lu10, Jinmin Zhao1, Qikai Hua1.   

Abstract

Background: Management of recalcitrant diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) remains difficult. Distraction osteogenesis mediates new bone formation and angiogenesis in the bone itself and the surrounding tissues. Recently it was reported that tibial cortex transverse transport (TTT) was associated with neovascularization and increased perfusion at the foot in patients with recalcitrant DFUs and facilitated healing and limb salvage. However, the findings were from several single-center studies with relatively small populations, which need to be confirmed in multicenter cohort studies with relatively large populations. Furthermore, the effect of this technique on patient's health-related quality of life is still unclear.
Methods: We treated patients with recalcitrant (University of Texas wound grading system 2-C to 3-D and not responding to prior routine conservative and surgical treatments for at least 8 weeks) DFUs from seven centers using TTT (a 5 ​cm ​× ​1.5 ​cm corticotomy followed by 4 weeks of medial and lateral distraction) between July 2016 and June 2019. We analyzed ulcer healing, major amputation, recurrence, health-related quality of life (physical and mental component summary scores), and complications in the 2-year follow-up. Foot arterial and perfusion changes were evaluated using computed tomography angiography and perfusion imaging 12 weeks postoperatively.
Results: A total of 1175 patients were enrolled. Patients who died (85, 7.2%) or lost to follow-up (18, 1.7%) were excluded, leaving 1072 patients for evaluation. Most of the patients were male (752, 70.1%) and with a mean age of 60.4 ​± ​9.1 years. The mean ulcer size was 41.0 ​± ​8.5 ​cm2 and 187 (16.6%) ulcers extended above the ankle. During the follow-up, 1019 (94.9%) patients healed in a mean time of 12.4 ​± ​5.6 weeks, 53 (4.9%) had major amputations, and 33 (3.1%) experienced recurrences. Compared to preoperatively, the patients had higher physical (26.2 ​± ​8.3 versus 41.3 ​± ​10.6, p ​= ​0.008) and mental (33.6 ​± ​10.7 versus 45.4 ​± ​11.3, p ​= ​0.031) component summary scores at the 2-year follow-up. Closed tibial fracture at the corticotomy site was found in 8 (0.7%) patients and was treated using external fixation and healed uneventfully. There were 23 (2.1%) patients who had pin site infections and were treated successfully with dressing changes. Compared to preoperatively, the patients had more small arteries and higher foot blood flow (8.1 ​± ​2.2 versus 28.3 ​± ​3.9 ml/100 ​g/min, p ​= ​0.003) and volume (1.5 ​± ​0.3 versus 2.7 ​± ​0.4 ml/100 ​g, p ​= ​0.037) 12 weeks postoperatively.
Conclusion: TTT promotes healing, limb salvage, and health-related quality of life in patients with recalcitrant DFUs as demonstrated in this multicenter cohort study. The surgical procedure was simple and straightforward and the complications were few and minor. The effect of this technique was associated with neovascularization and improved perfusion at the foot mediated by the cortex distraction. The findings are required to confirm in randomized controlled trials.The Translational Potential of this Article: TTT can be used as an effective treatment in patients with recalcitrant DFUs. The mechanism is associated with neovascularization and consequently increased perfusion in the foot after operation.
© 2022 The Authors.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Diabetic foot ulcer; Distraction angiogenesis; Health-related quality of life; Limb salvage; Perfusion; Tibial cortex transverse transport

Year:  2022        PMID: 36263383      PMCID: PMC9576490          DOI: 10.1016/j.jot.2022.09.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Translat        ISSN: 2214-031X            Impact factor:   4.889


  61 in total

1.  Limb salvage in patients with diabetes is not a temporary solution but a life-changing procedure.

Authors:  Laura Giurato; Erika Vainieri; Marco Meloni; Valentina Izzo; Valeria Ruotolo; Sebastiano Fabiano; Enrico Pampana; Benjamin Lipsky; Roberto Gandini; Luigi Uccioli
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 19.112

2.  Negative pressure wound therapy after partial diabetic foot amputation: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  David G Armstrong; Lawrence A Lavery
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005-11-12       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 3.  Diabetic Foot Ulcers and Their Recurrence.

Authors:  David G Armstrong; Andrew J M Boulton; Sicco A Bus
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-06-15       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  2012 Infectious Diseases Society of America clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections.

Authors:  Benjamin A Lipsky; Anthony R Berendt; Paul B Cornia; James C Pile; Edgar J G Peters; David G Armstrong; H Gunner Deery; John M Embil; Warren S Joseph; Adolf W Karchmer; Michael S Pinzur; Eric Senneville
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 9.079

5.  Hyperbaric oxygen therapy improves health-related quality of life in patients with diabetes and chronic foot ulcer.

Authors:  M Löndahl; M Landin-Olsson; P Katzman
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 4.359

6.  Identifying the incidence of and risk factors for reamputation among patients who underwent foot amputation.

Authors:  Yuriko Kono; Robert R Muder
Journal:  Ann Vasc Surg       Date:  2012-07-25       Impact factor: 1.466

Review 7.  Effectiveness of revascularization of the ulcerated foot in patients with diabetes and peripheral artery disease: a systematic review.

Authors:  R J Hinchliffe; J R W Brownrigg; G Andros; J Apelqvist; E J Boyko; R Fitridge; J L Mills; J Reekers; C P Shearman; R E Zierler; N C Schaper
Journal:  Diabetes Metab Res Rev       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.876

8.  Definitions and criteria for diabetic foot disease.

Authors:  Jaap J van Netten; Sicco A Bus; Jan Apelqvist; Benjamin A Lipsky; Robert J Hinchliffe; Frances Game; Gerry Rayman; Peter A Lazzarini; Rachael O Forsythe; Edgar J G Peters; Éric Senneville; Prashanth Vas; Matilde Monteiro-Soares; Nicolaas C Schaper
Journal:  Diabetes Metab Res Rev       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 4.876

Review 9.  2016 AHA/ACC Guideline on the Management of Patients With Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Authors:  Marie D Gerhard-Herman; Heather L Gornik; Coletta Barrett; Neal R Barshes; Matthew A Corriere; Douglas E Drachman; Lee A Fleisher; Francis Gerry R Fowkes; Naomi M Hamburg; Scott Kinlay; Robert Lookstein; Sanjay Misra; Leila Mureebe; Jeffrey W Olin; Rajan A G Patel; Judith G Regensteiner; Andres Schanzer; Mehdi H Shishehbor; Kerry J Stewart; Diane Treat-Jacobson; M Eileen Walsh
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2016-11-13       Impact factor: 29.690

10.  Computed tomography perfusion study evaluating the curative effect of tibial transverse transport in patients with severe diabetic foot.

Authors:  Zisan Zeng; Yan Dong; Qikai Hua; XiaoCong Kuang; Kai Li; Xianyu Deng; Shaohua Qiu
Journal:  J Orthop Translat       Date:  2019-05-12       Impact factor: 5.191

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.