Search

The aim of this meta‐analysis is to compare the clinical outcomes in patients with and without residual osteomyelitis (ROM) after surgical bone resection for diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). We completed a systematic literature search using PubMed, Scopus, and Embase using keywords DFO, Residual OM (ROM), and positive bone margins. The study outcomes included wound healing, antibiotic duration, amputation, and re‐infection. Five hundred and thirty patients were included in the analysis; 319 had no residual osteomyelitis (NROM), and 211 had ROM. There was not a significant difference in the proportion of wounds that healed 0.6 (p = 0.1, 95% confidence intervals [95% CI] 0.3–1.3). The risk of infection was 2.0 times higher (OR = 2.0, p = 0.02, 95% CI 1.1–3.4), and the risk of amputation was 4.3 times higher (OR = 4.3, p = 0.0001, 95% CI 2.4–7.6) in patients with ROM. Patients with ROM received antibiotics significantly longer. The mean difference was 16.3 days (p = 0.02, 95% CI 11.1–21.1). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To investigate risk factors for re‐infection and compare the outcomes in people with diabetic foot infections. A retrospective chart review was conducted, and 294 hospitalised patients with moderate to severe diabetic foot infections (DFIs) were analysed for this study. The diagnosis and classification of the severity of infection was based on the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) infection guidelines. Skin and soft tissue infections were diagnosed based on clinical observations as per IWGDF classification in addition to ruling out any suspected osteomyelitis (OM) through negative bone culture, MRI or WBC SPECT CT. OM was confirmed by bone culture or histopathology. Clinical outcomes were based on a 12‐month follow‐up period. All dichotomous outcomes were compared using χ2 with an alpha of 0.05. The result of this study shows a 48% rate of re‐infection in people admitted to our hospital with moderate and severe diabetic foot infections (DFI). Patients with osteomyelitis present during the index admission were 2.1 times more likely to experience a re‐infection than patients with soft tissue infection (56.7% vs. 38.0% respectively). In the univariate analysis, risk factors for re‐infection included osteomyelitis, non‐healing wounds, prolonged wound healing, antidepressants and leukocytosis. In the regression analysis, the only risk factor for re‐infection was wounds that were not healed >90 days (HR =2.0, CI: 1.5, 2.7, p = 0.001). Re‐infection is very common in patients with moderate and severe diabetic foot infections. Risk factors include osteomyelitis, non‐healing wound, prolonged wound healing, antidepressants and leukocytosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of the study was to compare outcomes in patients with complete surgical resection versus partial resection of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (OM). A post hoc analysis of 171 patients with OM was performed using data from two randomized clinical trials. OM was confirmed with bone culture or histopathology. Surgical culture specimens were obtained from resected bone and sent for histopathology and microbiology. Residual osteomyelitis (RO) was defined as a positive resected margin on culture or histopathology. No residual osteomyelitis (NRO) was defined as no growth from bone culture and no histopathological inflammation in the biopsy of the resection margin. Data from the 12‐month follow‐up were used to determine clinical outcomes. During the index hospitalization, NRO patients had significantly shorter duration of antibiotic therapy (NRO 21.0, 13.0–38.0 vs. RO 37.0, 20.8–50.0, p <0.01) and more amputations than patients with RO (NRO 89.9% vs. RO 60.9%, p <0.01). During the 12‐month follow‐up, patients with NRO also had significantly shorter duration of antibiotic therapy (NRO 42, 21.0–66.5 vs. RO 50.5, 35.0–75.0, p = 0.02). During the 12‐month follow‐up, there was no difference in ulceration at the same site (NRO 3.7%, RO 4.3% p = 0.85), hospitalization (NRO 32.6%, RO 34.8%, p = 0.76), total re‐infections (NRO 25.3%, RO 29.3%, p = 0.56), re‐infection with osteomyelitis (NRO 13.3% vs. 13.5%, p = 0.36), amputation (NRO 8.8%, RO 5.4%, p = 0.86) and time to wound healing in days (NRO 94, 41.0–365 vs. RO 106, 42.8–365, p = 0.77). Successful treatment of osteomyelitis was achieved by 86.7% and 86.5% of patients. During the index hospitalization, patients with no residual osteomyelitis had more amputations and were treated with antibiotics for a shorter duration. During the 12‐month follow‐up, patients with no residual osteomyelitis had shorter durations of antibiotics. There were no differences in re‐infection, amputation, re‐ulceration or hospitalization. Level of evidence: 1 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To identify the incidence of methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection, reinfection and clinical outcomes. Four hundred forty‐six patients that were admitted to the hospital with moderate or severe foot infections were retrospectively reviewed. Tissue and bone cultures were obtained from the index hospital admission. Conversion was defined as methicillin susceptible Staphylococcus aureus in the first culture and subsequently MRSA when there was a reinfection. The incidence of MRSA was 7.8% (n = 35), with no significant difference between soft tissue infections (7.7%) and osteomyelitis (8.0%). MRSA incidence was 9.4 times higher in non‐diabetics (23.8% vs. 3.2%, p = <0.01). The incidence of reinfection was 40.8% (n = 182). Conversion to MRSA was seen in 2.2% (n = 4) total, occurring in 5.4%. Non‐diabetics were 20.1 times more likely to have MRSA reinfection than people with diabetes (28.6% vs. 1.9%, p < 0.001). MRSA patients had a higher proportion of healed wounds (82.4% vs. 69.3%, p = 0.02). There were no differences in other clinical outcomes in MRSA vs. other infections in reinfection (28.6% vs. 24.3%, p = 0.11), amputation (48.6% vs. 52.0%, p = 0.69) or hospitalization (28.6% vs. 42.6, p = 0.11). The incidence of MRSA for the first infection (7.8%), reinfection (6.0%) and conversion to MRSA (2.2%) was low. MRSA was 9.4 times more common in people without diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to review the current literature of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) use in real world cohorts inclusive of chronic limb threatening ischemia (CLTI) patients and compare the outcomes to patients imaged by angiography alone.The systematic review was registered in Research Registry. A literature search was performed across 4 databases: PubMed, Medline/Embase, Cochrane Review, and Web of Science for eligible comparative studies. The primary outcomes examined were clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR), amputation (including minor below the ankle and major above the ankle), all-cause mortality, limb salvage and mean balloon dilation. A random effects model was used when pooling outcomes to account for heterogeneity. Publication bias was determined using eggers test and illustrated on a funnel plot.Six studies were included in this review, with a total of 1883 subjects with Rutherford 1-6. Among the 1883 subjects, 940 had Rutherford 4-6. IVUS was used in 1294 subjects and angiography alone was used in 589 subjects. Pooled analysis determined no significant association in IVUS + angiography with CD-TLR (O.R = 1.43 [CI: 0.80, 2.58]), all-cause amputation (O.R = 0.63 [CI: 0.34, 1.17]), and all-cause mortality (O.R = 0.63 [CI: 0.34, 1.17]). Sub analysis of subjects with CLTI, Rutherford classes 4-6 showed an association between IVUS + angiography use with limb salvage at 1 year, O.R = 2.22 [1.24, 3.97].The use of IVUS + angiography compared to angiography alone showed larger reference vessel diameter in both all-inclusive Rutherford classifications and the CLTI subset. The use of IVUS + angiography compared to angiography alone showed no difference in CD-TLR at 12 months, lower extremity amputation, and all-cause mortality for Rutherford 1-6. The use of IVUS + angiography compared to angiography alone in the CLTI subset analysis improved limb salvage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We assessed the clinical outcomes of patients with critical limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) who underwent interwoven nitinol stent (Supera) implantation for significant stenoses of the femoropopliteal segment. In this retrospective cohort study, 116 consecutive patients with CLTI who were treated with Supera stents between September 2015 and March 2020 were included in this analysis. Primary endpoint analysis was completed for amputation-free survival, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and mortality. After a mean follow-up time of 3.4 years, 21 (18%) patients had undergone amputations, 3 (2.6%) died, and, overall, the amputation-free survival rate was 81%. TLR occurred in 21 (18%) patients, resulting in the freedom from target lesion revascularization of 82%. The average Wagner score for all patients was 2.8 ± 1.1. A subgroup analysis of 57 patients revealed a median ulcer size of 3.0 cm2 [1.65, 9.0], with complete healing for 45 patients by 20 months. The Wagner score of this subgroup decreased by an average of 3.4 ±.9 points. Supera stents can be used together with other endovascular therapies and are a safe and effective treatment modality for CLTI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]