Search

Background: The quantitative interpretation of the radiometric information extracted from infrared (IR) images in individuals with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) is an open problem yet to be solved. This is of particular value given that DM2 is a worldwide health problem and onset for evolution toward diabetic foot disease (DFD). Since DM2 causes changes at the vascular and neurological levels, the metabolic heat distribution on the outer skin is modified as a consequence of such alterations. Of particular interest in this contribution are those alterations displayed over the skin's heat patterns at the lower limbs. At the core of such alterations is the deterioration of the vascular and neurological networks responsible for procuring systemic thermoregulation. It is within this context that IR imaging is introduced as a likely aiding tool to assist with the clinical diagnosis of DM2 at stages early enough to prevent the evolution of the DFD., Methods: IR images of lower limbs are acquired from a cohort of individuals clinically diagnosed with and without DM2. Additional inclusion criteria for patients are to be free from any visible wound or tissue-related trauma (e.g., injuries, edema, and so forth), and also free from non-metabolic comorbidities. All images and data are equally processed and analyzed using indices that evaluate the spatial and temporal evolution of temperature distribution in lower limbs. We studied the temporal response of individuals' legs after inducing an external stimulus. For this purpose, we combine the information of the asymmetry and thermal response index (ATR) and the thermal response index (TRI), computed using images at different times, improving the results previously obtained individually with ATR and TRI., Results: A novel representation of the information extracted from IR images of the lower limbs in individuals with and without DM2 is presented. This representation was built using the ATR and TRI indices for the anterior and posterior views (PVs), individually and combining the information from both views. In all cases, the information of each index and each view presents linearity properties that allow said information to be interpreted quantitatively in a well-defined and limited space. This representation, built in a polar coordinate space, allows obtaining sensitivity values of 86%, 97%, and 97%, and specificity values of 83%, 72%, and 78% for the anterior view (AV), the PV, and the combined views, respectively. Additionally, it was observed that the angular variable that defines this new representation space allows to significantly (p < 0.01) differentiate the groups, while correlating with clinical variables of interest, such as glucose and glycated hemoglobin., Conclusion: The linearity properties that exist between the ATR and TRI indices allow a quantitative interpretation of the information extracted from IR images of the lower extremities of individuals with and without DM2, and allow the construction of a representation space that eliminates possible ambiguities in the interpretation, while simplifying it, making it accessible for clinical use., (© 2024 The Author(s). Skin Research and Technology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: Diabetic kidney disease favors diabetic foot ulcers, however we do not know whether the reverse relation exists. We investigated whether diabetic foot disease (DFD) related to an increased risk of developing renal events., Research Design and Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of a cohort of patients hospitalized for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) between 2009 and 2017, stratified for the risk of diabetic foot ulcer grades 0 (no risk), 1 and 2 (at risk), and 3 (DFD) according to the International Work Group on Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) classification. We highlighted new renal events (end-stage renal disease or a doubling of serum creatinine) in their medical records until December 2020. The relationship between DFD and later renal events was analyzed by multivariable Cox regression model., Results: Among 519 patients, 142 (27 %) had a DFD at baseline, and 159 (30 %) were classified as Grades 1 or 2. Thirty-six renal events occurred during the 54 ± 27 months of follow-up: 19 subjects started dialysis, 1 had a renal transplantation, and 16 had a doubling of serum creatinine: 15 each in subjects with DFD and subjects at risk, versus 6 in subjects with Grade 0 DFD (logrank: P = 0.001). Adjusted for i) age and sex; ii) hyperglycemic exposure; iii) conventional cardiovascular risk factors; iv) renal parameters: and v) new diabetic foot ulcers during follow-up, DFD (HR 2.7 to 5.9) and being at risk of DFD Grades 1-2 (HR 2.8 to 5.1) were significantly related to new renal events., Conclusion: The risk of renal events was increased in people with T2DM and DFD., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Fadi Alkhami researched data and wrote the manuscript. No conflict of interest. Sébastien Rubin researched data and reviewed the manuscript. No conflict of interest. Gauthier Borderie researched data and reviewed the manuscript. No conflict of interest. Ninon Foussard researched data and reviewed the manuscript. No conflict of interest. Alice Larroumet researched data and reviewed the manuscript. No conflict of interest. Laurence Blanco researched data and reviewed the manuscript. No conflict of interest. Marie-Amélie Barbet-Massin researched data and reviewed the manuscript. No conflict of interest. Frédéric Domenge researched data and reviewed the manuscript. No conflict of interest. Kamel Mohammedi researched data and reviewed the manuscript. No conflict of interest. Vincent Rigalleau is the corresponding author, researched data, performed all the statistical analyses and wrote the manuscript. No conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.)

Background: To evaluate the association between diabetic foot disease (DFD) and the incidence of fatal and non-fatal events in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) from primary-care settings., Methods: We built a cohort of people with a first DFD episode during 2010-2015, followed up until 2018. These subjects were 1 to 1 propensity score matched to subjects with T2DM without DFD. The incidence of all-cause mortality, the occurrence of new DFD, amputations, cardiovascular diseases, or composite outcome, including all-cause mortality and/or cardiovascular events during the follow-up period, were calculated. A Cox proportional hazard analysis was conducted to evaluate the hazard ratios (HR) for different events., Results: Overall, 11,117 subjects with T2DM with a first episode of DFD were compared with subjects without DFD. We observed higher incidence rates (IRs) for composite outcome (33.9 vs. 14.5 IR per 100 person-years) and a new DFD episode event (22.2 vs. 1.1 IR per 100 person-years) in the DFD group. Compared to those without DFD, those with a first episode of DFD had a higher HR for all events, with excess rates particularly for amputation and new DFD occurrence (HR: 19.4, 95% CI: 16.7-22.6, HR: 15.1, 95% CI: 13.8-16.5, respectively) was found., Conclusions: Although DFD often coexists with other risk factors, it carries an intrinsic high risk of morbidity and mortality in individuals with T2DM. DFD should be regarded as a severe complication already at its onset, as it carries a poor clinical prognosis., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objective: Cancer has been proposed as the primary cause of death in type 2 diabetes (T2D). The life expectancy is reduced after a diabetic foot ulcer. We investigated whether Diabetic Foot Disease related to an increased risk of developing a new cancer., Research Design and Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis on a cohort of patients hospitalized for T2D between 2009 and 2017, stratified for the risk of diabetic foot ulcer (International Working Group on Diabetic Foot classification). We highlighted new cancers in their medical records until December 2020. The relationship between Diabetic Foot Disease and later cancers was analyzed by multivariable Cox regression and survival curves were compared., Results: Among 519 patients, 27% had a Diabetic Foot Disease, and 159 were classified as grades 1 or 2 (at risk). As compared to the 218 patients graded 0 according to the IWGDF, they were more men, older, with a longer duration of diabetes, more vascular complications, a greater incidence of insulin use, and a higher skin autofluorescence. During the 54 months of follow-up, 63 (12.1%) new cancers were diagnosed. Baseline Diabetic Foot Disease was significantly associated with a higher risk of cancer (multivariable adjusted Hazard ratio: 2.08, 95%CI: 1.02-4.25), whereas the relation was not significant for subjects at risk of DFU (HR: 1.65, 95%CI:0.81-3.35) CONCLUSION: The risk of cancer was increased twofold in T2D with Diabetic Foot Disease., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest No competing financial interests exist. No conflict of interest and no disclosure exist., (Copyright © 2023 Research Trust of DiabetesIndia (DiabetesIndia) and National Diabetes Obesity and Cholesterol Foundation (N-DOC). Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To disclose prevalence, demographic, foot characteristics as well as management and lower-extremity amputations (LEAs) of subjects with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on diabetic foot diseases (DFDs)., Methods: Data were derived from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database between 2004 and 2017. DFDs were defined as ulcers, infections, or severe peripheral arterial diseases (PADs) in patients with type 2 diabetes. Clinical characteristics were analyzed between subjects with and without ESRD., Results: Subjects with ESRD have increased impacts on the DFD population either from annual prevalence (2.7 % to 10.42 %, P for trend < 0.001), or proportional representation in LEAs (7.91 % to 26.37 %, P < 0.001) over 14 years. The annual trends for major-LEAs rates have decreased in both subjects with and without ESRD (13.67 % to 5.82 % and 3.48 % to 1.47 %, both P < 0.001). Notably, the concomitant increase of endovascular treatments (EVTs) (7.09 % to 29.41 %, P < 0.001) was associated with the decrease of major-LEAs (P for interaction < 0.001) in subjects with ESRD., Conclusions: As the annual prevalence of subjects with ESRD has increased 3.9-fold over years, they now account for more than 30% of annual major-LEA of the total DFD population. Interdisciplinary team approach and aggressive EVTs might reduce major-LEAs in these patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Our study aimed to assess the prevalence of diabetic foot disease (DFD) and its associated risk factors among subjects attending primary care centers in Catalonia (Spain)., Methods: We undertook a cross-sectional analysis of data from the primary health care (SIDIAP) database. The presence of comorbidities and concomitant medication were analyzed for subjects with or without DFD. DFD prevalence was estimated from 1st January 2018 to 31st December 2018., Results: During the 12-month observational period, out of 394,266 people with type 2 diabetes, we identified 3,277 (0.83%) active episodes of DFD in the database. The majority of these episodes were foot ulcers (82%). The mean age of patients with DFD was 70.3 (± 12.5) years and 55% were male. In the multivariable descriptive models, male gender, diabetes duration, hypertension, macrovascular, microvascular complications, and insulin and antiplatelet agents were strongly associated with DFD. A previous history of DFD was the stronger risk factor for DFD occurrence in subjects with T2DM (OR: 13.19, 95%CI: 11.81; 14.72)., Conclusions: In this real-world primary care practice database, we found a lower prevalence of DFD compared to similar previous studies. Risk factors such as male sex, duration of diabetes, diabetes complications and previous history of DFD were associated with the presence of DFD., Competing Interests: MM-C has received advisory and/or speaking fees from Astra-Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Lilly, MSD, NOVARTIS, NovoNordisk, and Sanofi. He has received research grants to the institution from Astra-Zeneca, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, NovoNordisk, and Sanofi. He has received research grants from Institut Universitari d’Investigació en Atenció Primària Jordi Gol IDIAP Jordi Gol Barcelona, Spain, Instituto de Salud Carlos III Madrid, Spain, Generalitat de Catalunya. Peris 2016-2020. The Strategic Plan for Health Research and Innovation Barcelona, Spain. JF-N has received advisory and/or speaking fees from Astra-Zeneca, Ascensia, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, NovoNordisk, and Sanofi. He has received research grants to the institution from Astra-Zeneca, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, NovoNordisk, Sanofi, and Boehringer. DM has received advisory and/or speaking fees from Almirall, Esteve, Ferrer, Janssen, Lilly, Menarini, MSD, NovoNordisk and Sanofi. MB and JL have received advisory and speaking fees from MSD. EJ has received educational, sponsorship and speaker fees from Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Lilly, Novonordisk and Sanofi. XC has received speaker’s bureau and advisory board honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Esteve, Lilly Diabetes, Novo Nordisk A/S, Roche, and Sanofi. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Bundó, Vlacho, Llussà, Puig-Treserra, Mata-Cases, Cos, Jude, Franch-Nadal and Mauricio.)

Aim: We aimed to compare the mortality of individuals at low, moderate, and high risk of diabetic foot disease (DFD) in the context of newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes, before developing active diabetic foot problem., Methods: This was a population-based cohort study of adults with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes utilizing IQVIA Medical Research Data. The outcome was all-cause mortality among individuals with low, moderate, and high risk of DFD, and also in those with no record of foot assessment and those who declined foot examination., Results: Of 225,787 individuals with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes, 34,061 (15.1%) died during the study period from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2019. Moderate risk and high risk of DFD were associated with increased mortality risk compared to low risk of DFD (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.50, 95% CI 1.42, 1.58; aHR 2.01, 95% CI 1.84, 2.20, respectively). Individuals who declined foot examination or who had no record also had increased mortality risk of 75% and 25% vs. those at low risk of DFD, respectively (aHR 1.75, 95% CI 1.51, 2.04; aHR 1.25, 95% CI 1.20, 1.30)., Conclusion: Individuals with new-onset type 2 diabetes who had moderate to high risk of DFD were more likely to die compared to those at low risk of DFD. The associations between declined foot examination and absence of foot examinations, and increased risk of mortality further highlight the importance of assessing foot risk as it identifies not only patients at risk of diabetic foot ulceration but also mortality., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wang, Hazlehurst, Subramanian, Tahrani, Hanif, Thomas, Singh, Wang, Sainsbury, Nirantharakumar and Crowe.)

Aims: A diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a severe condition associated with morbidity and mortality. Population-based studies are rare and limited by access to reliable data. Without this data, efforts in primary prevention cannot be evaluated. Therefore, we examined the incidence and changes over time for the first DFU in people with diabetes. We also examined hospitalization and all-cause mortality and their changes over time., Methods: From the UK primary care CPRD GOLD database (2007-2017), we identified 129,624 people with diabetes by a prescription for insulin or a non-insulin anti-diabetic drug. DFUs were identified using Read codes and expressed as incidence rates (IRs). Changes over time were described using Poisson and logistic regression and expressed as incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and odds ratios (ORs) respectively., Results: The mean IR of first registered DFUs was 2.5 [95% CI: 2.1-2.9] per 1000 person-years for people with type 2 diabetes and 1.6 [1.3-1.9] per 1000 person-years for people with type 1. The IRs declined for people with type 2 diabetes (IRR per year: 0.97 [0.96-0.99]), while no changes were observed for people with type 1 diabetes (IRR per year: 0.96 [0.89-1.04]). Average hospitalization and 1-year mortality risk for people with type 2 diabetes were 8.2% [SD: 4.7] and 11.7% [SD: 2.2] respectively. Both declined over time (OR: 0.89 [0.84, 0.94] and 0.94 [0.89, 0.99])., Conclusion: The decline in all IRs, hospitalizations and mortality in people with type 2 diabetes suggests that prevention and care of the first DFU has improved for this group in primary care in the UK., (© 2021 Diabetes UK.)

Type 2 diabetes is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, fatty liver disease, eye and foot disease. But equally, these conditions are associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Rather than being simply considered complications of diabetes, as exists within a 'pure' type 1 diabetes paradigm, both type 2 diabetes and its comorbidities are primarily caused by a failure to efficiently sequester excess energy leading to the accumulation of sick fat (adiposopathy). Type 2 diabetes is a symptom of a chronic disease complex, just as cardiovascular, renal, eye, foot and/or liver disease, are. In addition, each of these conditions feed forward so that dysfunction in one system accelerates dysfunction in another, partly through their shared pathogenesis and partly due dysfunction that follows in their wake. This review will explore the sticky, brittle conglomeration of CArdiac, Renal, Adipo-Metabolic, Eye and Liver disease (hereafter collectively known as CARAMEL disease) that is coincident in most patients with type 2 diabetes and contextualise the recent changes in diabetes guidelines that now specifically focus on identifying and aggressively managing these high-risk individuals with it., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background and Objectives : To propose a new classification of diabetic foot syndrome adapted for inclusion in the ICD-10 (the ICD-10 is the 10th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases) and providing more reliable data on the number of clinical cases. Materials and Methods : A randomized controlled trial was performed. A total of 180 patients (36.6%) discharged from the hospital after surgical treatment and 312 patients (63.4%) who applied independently were observed and analysed. All patients had type 2 diabetes and were comparable in gender, age, duration of diabetes, area and nature of the wound defect. Results : We proposed to add the following to the existing ICD-10 and the emerging ICD-11 codes: Edf10.0-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus with diabetic foot syndrome and Edf11.0-non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus with diabetic foot syndrome, where "df" is an acronym for diabetic foot. The new classification designates the seven most frequent areas of the lesion and five degrees of depth of soft tissue lesions. Conclusions : The proposed classification adapted for ICD-10 will enable the standardisation of diagnosis, providing a complete picture of this complication of diabetes mellitus, determining the number of amputations and their validity. Accurate statistics will allow for objective funding and timely preventive measures.

Aims and Objectives: To assess primary healthcare professionals' priority for managing diabetic foot disease (DFD) over the progressive course of the condition compared to other aspects of diabetes care., Background: DFD affects up to 60 million people globally. Evidence suggests that comprehensive preventative footcare may reduce serious complications of DFD, such as amputation., Design: A cross-sectional quantitative study reported according to STROBE statement., Methods: General Practitioners (GPs) and Credentialled Diabetes Educators (CDEs) working within Australian primary care were invited to complete an online survey, to obtain information about preventative and early intervention footcare priorities and practices. Ten GPs and 84 CDEs completed the survey., Results: On diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) review was identified to be one of the top three priorities of care by 57 (61%) of participants whilst at 20-year history of diabetes 73 (78%) participants indicated its priority. Foot assessments became a priority for 78% (n = 73) of participants and podiatry referrals a priority for 53% (n = 50) of participants only when a "foot concern" was raised. Referrals to specialist high-risk foot podiatrists or services were a first priority for 56% (n = 53), when the person had significant amputation risk factors., Conclusion: Diabetes-related preventative footcare assessments and management remain a low priority amongst primary healthcare professionals. Preventative care for asymptomatic complications, such as DFD, may be overlooked in favour of monitoring HbA1c or medication management. Limited prioritisation of footcare in primary care is concerning given the risks for amputation associated with DFD., Relevance to Clinical Practice: This study reveals the need for primary healthcare decision makers and clinicians to ensure preventative footcare is a focused priority earlier in the diabetes care continuum. Collaborative and widespread promotion of the importance of proactive rather than reactive footcare practices is required to support prevention of foot ulcers and amputation., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Diabetic foot disease is a source of major patient suffering and societal costs. Investing in evidence-based international guidelines on diabetic foot disease is likely among the most cost-effective forms of health care expenditure, provided the guidelines are outcome focused, evidence based, and properly implemented. The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published and updated international guidelines since 1999. The 2019 updates are based on formulating relevant clinical questions and outcomes, rigorous systematic reviews of the literature, and recommendations that are specific, and unambiguous along with their transparent rationale, all using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. We herein describe the development of the 2019 IWGDF guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease, which consists of six chapters, each prepared by a separate working group of international experts. These documents provide guidelines related to diabetic foot disease on prevention; offloading; peripheral artery disease; infection; wound healing interventions; and classification of diabetic foot ulcers. Based on these six chapters, the IWGDF Editorial Board also produced a set of practical guidelines. Each guideline underwent extensive review by the members of the IWGDF Editorial Board as well as independent international experts in each field. We believe that adoption and implementation of the 2019 IWGDF guidelines by health care providers, public health agencies, and policymakers will result in improved prevention and management of diabetic foot disease and a subsequent worldwide reduction in the patient and societal burden this disease causes., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Integration of objective biomechanical measures of foot function into the design process for insoles has been shown to provide enhanced plantar tissue protection for individuals at-risk of plantar ulceration. The use of virtual simulations utilizing numerical modeling techniques offers a potential approach to further optimize these devices. In a patient population at-risk of foot ulceration, we aimed to compare the pressure offloading performance of insoles that were optimized via numerical simulation techniques against shape-based devices. Twenty participants with diabetes and at-risk feet were enrolled in this study. Three pairs of personalized insoles: one based on shape data and subsequently manufactured via direct milling; and two were based on a design derived from shape, pressure, and ultrasound data which underwent a finite element analysis-based virtual optimization procedure. For the latter set of insole designs, one pair was manufactured via direct milling, and a second pair was manufactured through 3D printing. The offloading performance of the insoles was analyzed for forefoot regions identified as having elevated plantar pressures. In 88% of the regions of interest, the use of virtually optimized insoles resulted in lower peak plantar pressures compared to the shape-based devices. Overall, the virtually optimized insoles significantly reduced peak pressures by a mean of 41.3kPa (p<0.001, 95% CI [31.1, 51.5]) for milled and 40.5kPa (p<0.001, 95% CI [26.4, 54.5]) for printed devices compared to shape-based insoles. The integration of virtual optimization into the insole design process resulted in improved offloading performance compared to standard, shape-based devices., Clinical Trial Registration: ISRCTN19805071, www.ISRCTN.org., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Diabetic foot disease heavily weighs upon diabetics, being a significant cause of morbidity and severe disability. Their prevention is indispensable. Our study aimed to reduce the rate of amputations in diabetics. We conducted a retrospective, descriptive, cross-sectional, multicenter study of podiatric risk screening in patients with type 2 diabetes in the Endocrinology Department at the University Hospital of Befelatanana and at the Amadia Clinic, Faravohitra, over a period of 6 months. The average age of our patients was 54.43 years. Male sex predominated (60%). The patients suffered from diabetes which had evolved, on average, over a period of 7.35 years. The most common patient's history was smoking and chronic ulcerations of the foot. More than half of patients had an imbalance of diabetes, microalbuminuria and retinopathy. 56.50% of patients were aware of their risk but less than 46% of patients gave specific examples of appropriate behaviour. Only 13.33% of patients had undergone foot examination before this study. Their podiatric risk was very high. Predictive factors for ulceration included smoking, a history of chronic ulcer of the lower limbs, an imbalance of diabetes and foot deformity. Effective prevention strategies for amputations should include the screening and the identification of population at risk of ulceration.