Ultrasound Assisted Wound Debridement (UAW) Versus Standard Wound Treatment in Complicated Diabetic Foot Ulcers (DFU)
Cellular Proliferation, Dermal Repair, and Microbiological Effectiveness of Ultrasound Assisted Wound Debridement (UAW) Versus Standard Wound Treatment in Complicated Diabetic Foot Ulcers (DFU): A Randomized Controlled Trial
1 other identifier
interventional
51
1 country
2
Brief Summary
The investigators aimed to elucidate the effects of UAW debridement on cellular proliferation and dermal repair in complicated diabetic foot ulcers as compared to diabetic foot ulcers receiving surgical/sharp wound debridement. A randomized controlled trial was performed involving outpatients with complicated diabetic foot ulcers that either received surgical debridement or UAW debridement every week during a six-week treatment period.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable
Started Nov 2017
Typical duration for not_applicable
2 active sites
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
November 1, 2017
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
November 1, 2018
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
December 31, 2019
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
October 30, 2020
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
November 18, 2020
CompletedResults Posted
Study results publicly available
July 14, 2021
CompletedJuly 14, 2021
June 1, 2021
1 year
October 30, 2020
April 27, 2021
June 23, 2021
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (3)
Change From Baseline Neo-angiogenesis (Microvessel Density) at 6 Weeks
Sections of tissue were immunohistochemically-stained with the CD31 marker. Light microscopy was used to count the number of microvessels/endothelial cells in a standardized grid, with the results expressed as microvessel density (Leica DMD 800 morphometric system). Microvessel density was scored according to the following scale: 0 (absent), 1 (low, at least one microvessel), 2 (moderate) and 3 (more than two micro vessels). Higher scores mean a better outcome
At week zero and week 6
Change From Baseline Collagen Formation (Collagen Content ) at 6 Weeks
Massons's trichome staining was used to differentiate collagen content from other components, such as muscle fibrin and erythrocytes, in tissue samples. Collagen content was scored according to the following scale: 0 (absent), 1 (mild), 2 (moderate) and 3 (severe). Higher scores mean a better outcome.
At week zero and week 6
Change From Baseline Myofibroblasts Formation (Myofibroblasts Content) at 6 Weeks
Actin staining was used to evaluate the presence of myofibroblasts involved in wound healing. These cells increase in number during wound healing. The number of stained cells was semi-quantitatively analyzed using a 0 - 3 scaling score (0= no myofibroblasts, 1= myofibroblasts in low quantity, 2= myofibroblasts in moderate quantity, 3= myofibroblasts in high quantity)
At week zero and week 6
Secondary Outcomes (3)
Comparison of Quantitative Microbiological Analysis (Bacterial Counts Expressed Colony-forming Units Per Gram of Tissue) (CFU/g)
At week zero and week 6
Wound Score at 6 Weeks
Six weeks
Wound Size
6 weeks
Study Arms (2)
Ultrasound Group (UAW group)
EXPERIMENTALUAW debridement was performed using an UAW SONOCA 185 device (Söring GmbH, Germany). The UAW device generates an ultrasound low frequency of 25kHz and is equipped with three UAW instruments with different sonotrode shapes. The choice of sonotrode depends on wound depth, which ranges from superficial to deep. The UAW instrument piezoelectrically transforms the electrical energy delivered from the UAW device into mechanical oscillations in the sonotrode tip. For most wounds in the UAW group, a two-minute treatment with 40% intensity was performed by holding the sonotrode in contact mode, holding it perpendicular to the wound bed and moving it across in an up-and-down pattern.
Surgical group
ACTIVE COMPARATORAll debridement procedures were performed by the same surgeon (J.L.M.), who is specialist in diabetic foot surgery with more than 20 years of experience. Surgical debridement involved removal of all necrotic and devitalized tissue that was incompatible with healing, as well as surrounding callus.
Interventions
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Male and female patients ≥18 years old
- Type 1 or type 2 diabetes with levels of HbA1c≤85.8 mmol/mol (10%) within 30 days of the beginning of the study
- Wound stages IB, IIB, ID, and IID according to the University of Texas Diabetic Wound Classification \[11\]
- Wound duration of 1-24 months
- Wound size between 1-30 cm2 after debridement
- Clinical picture of wounds showing mild or moderate infection, according to the criteria of the Infectious Disease Society of America Guidelines \[12\] and the European Wound Management Association (EWMA) \[13\]
- Ankle-brachial index (ABI) ≤0.9 and ankle systolic blood pressure (ASBP) ≥70mmHg, or toe systolic blood pressure (TSBP) ≥50mmHg, ABI\>0.9, TSBP ≥50mmHg and toe-brachial index (TBI) ≤0.7
You may not qualify if:
- Chronic renal disease or dialysis
- Non-treated osteomyelitis
- Necrotizing soft tissue infections
- Critical limb ischaemia patients with ABI≤0.5 and ASBP\<70mmHg or \<50mmHg
- Life expectancy \<6 months due to malignant DFU
- Pregnancy and lactation
- Patients diagnosed with hepatitis or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)
- Patients showing local or systemic conditions that may impair tissue repair
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Universidad Complutense de Madridlead
- Francisco Javier Álvaro Afonsocollaborator
- David Sevillano Fernándezcollaborator
- Yolanda García Álvarezcollaborator
- Irene Sanz Corbalancollaborator
- Esther García Moralescollaborator
Study Sites (2)
Fancisco Javier Álvaro Afonso
Madrid, 28039, Spain
José Luis Lázaro Martínez
Madrid, 28039, Spain
Related Publications (26)
Schaper NC, van Netten JJ, Apelqvist J, Bus SA, Hinchliffe RJ, Lipsky BA; IWGDF Editorial Board. Practical Guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease (IWGDF 2019 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020 Mar;36 Suppl 1:e3266. doi: 10.1002/dmrr.3266.
PMID: 32176447BACKGROUNDKim PJ, Steinberg JS. Wound care: biofilm and its impact on the latest treatment modalities for ulcerations of the diabetic foot. Semin Vasc Surg. 2012 Jun;25(2):70-4. doi: 10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2012.04.008.
PMID: 22817855BACKGROUNDKingsley A, Lewis T, White R. Debridement and wound biofilms. J Wound Care. 2011 Jun;20(6):286. No abstract available.
PMID: 21739682BACKGROUNDSwanson T, Lazaro-Martinez JL, Braumann C, Kirchhoff JB, Gachter B, van Acker K. Ultrasonic-assisted wound debridement: report from a closed panel meeting. J Wound Care. 2020 Feb 2;29(2):128-135. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2020.29.2.128.
PMID: 32058848BACKGROUNDRayman G, Vas P, Dhatariya K, Driver V, Hartemann A, Londahl M, Piaggesi A, Apelqvist J, Attinger C, Game F; International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF). Guidelines on use of interventions to enhance healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020 Mar;36 Suppl 1:e3283. doi: 10.1002/dmrr.3283.
PMID: 32176450BACKGROUNDLazaro-Martinez JL, Alvaro-Afonso FJ, Garcia-Alvarez Y, Molines-Barroso RJ, Garcia-Morales E, Sevillano-Fernandez D. Ultrasound-assisted debridement of neuroischaemic diabetic foot ulcers, clinical and microbiological effects: a case series. J Wound Care. 2018 May 2;27(5):278-286. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2018.27.5.278.
PMID: 29738301BACKGROUNDAltland OD, Dalecki D, Suchkova VN, Francis CW. Low-intensity ultrasound increases endothelial cell nitric oxide synthase activity and nitric oxide synthesis. J Thromb Haemost. 2004 Apr;2(4):637-43. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2004.00655.x.
PMID: 15102020BACKGROUNDDriver VR, Yao M. Discussion. Current status of the use of modalities in wound care: electrical stimulation and ultrasound therapy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011 Jan;127 Suppl 1:103S-104S. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182050c35. No abstract available.
PMID: 21200279BACKGROUNDEnnis WJ, Foremann P, Mozen N, Massey J, Conner-Kerr T, Meneses P. Ultrasound therapy for recalcitrant diabetic foot ulcers: results of a randomized, double-blind, controlled, multicenter study. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2005 Aug;51(8):24-39.
PMID: 16234574BACKGROUNDDriver VR, Yao M, Miller CJ. Noncontact low-frequency ultrasound therapy in the treatment of chronic wounds: a meta-analysis. Wound Repair Regen. 2011 Jul-Aug;19(4):475-80. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2011.00701.x. Epub 2011 Jun 7.
PMID: 21649783BACKGROUNDArmstrong DG, Lavery LA, Harkless LB. Validation of a diabetic wound classification system. The contribution of depth, infection, and ischemia to risk of amputation. Diabetes Care. 1998 May;21(5):855-9. doi: 10.2337/diacare.21.5.855.
PMID: 9589255BACKGROUNDLipsky BA, Berendt AR, Cornia PB, Pile JC, Peters EJ, Armstrong DG, Deery HG, Embil JM, Joseph WS, Karchmer AW, Pinzur MS, Senneville E; Infectious Diseases Society of America. 2012 Infectious Diseases Society of America clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2012 Jun;54(12):e132-73. doi: 10.1093/cid/cis346.
PMID: 22619242BACKGROUNDBoulton AJ, Armstrong DG, Albert SF, Frykberg RG, Hellman R, Kirkman MS, Lavery LA, Lemaster JW, Mills JL Sr, Mueller MJ, Sheehan P, Wukich DK; American Diabetes Association; American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists. Comprehensive foot examination and risk assessment: a report of the task force of the foot care interest group of the American Diabetes Association, with endorsement by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists. Diabetes Care. 2008 Aug;31(8):1679-85. doi: 10.2337/dc08-9021. No abstract available.
PMID: 18663232BACKGROUNDTan T, Shaw EJ, Siddiqui F, Kandaswamy P, Barry PW, Baker M; Guideline Development Group. Inpatient management of diabetic foot problems: summary of NICE guidance. BMJ. 2011 Mar 23;342:d1280. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d1280. No abstract available.
PMID: 21430002BACKGROUNDBus SA, Armstrong DG, Gooday C, Jarl G, Caravaggi C, Viswanathan V, Lazzarini PA; International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF). Guidelines on offloading foot ulcers in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020 Mar;36 Suppl 1:e3274. doi: 10.1002/dmrr.3274.
PMID: 32176441BACKGROUNDTardaguila-Garcia A, Lazaro-Martinez JL, Sanz-Corbalan I, Garcia-Alvarez Y, Alvaro-Afonso FJ, Garcia-Morales E. Correlation between Empirical Antibiotic Therapy and Bone Culture Results in Patients with Osteomyelitis. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2019 Jan;32(1):41-44. doi: 10.1097/01.ASW.0000542527.48815.1f.
PMID: 30376455BACKGROUNDWang D, Stockard CR, Harkins L, Lott P, Salih C, Yuan K, Buchsbaum D, Hashim A, Zayzafoon M, Hardy RW, Hameed O, Grizzle W, Siegal GP. Immunohistochemistry in the evaluation of neovascularization in tumor xenografts. Biotech Histochem. 2008 Jun;83(3-4):179-89. doi: 10.1080/10520290802451085.
PMID: 18846440BACKGROUNDAchar RA, Silva TC, Achar E, Martines RB, Machado JL. Use of insulin-like growth factor in the healing of open wounds in diabetic and non-diabetic rats. Acta Cir Bras. 2014 Feb;29(2):125-31. doi: 10.1590/S0102-86502014000200009.
PMID: 24604317BACKGROUNDWollina U, Schmidt WD, Kronert C, Nelskamp C, Scheibe A, Fassler D. Some effects of a topical collagen-based matrix on the microcirculation and wound healing in patients with chronic venous leg ulcers: preliminary observations. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2005 Dec;4(4):214-24. doi: 10.1177/1534734605283001.
PMID: 16286373BACKGROUNDWorld Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013 Nov 27;310(20):2191-4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281053. No abstract available.
PMID: 24141714BACKGROUNDMaan ZN, Januszyk M, Rennert RC, Duscher D, Rodrigues M, Fujiwara T, Ho N, Whitmore A, Hu MS, Longaker MT, Gurtner GC. Noncontact, low-frequency ultrasound therapy enhances neovascularization and wound healing in diabetic mice. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014 Sep;134(3):402e-411e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000467.
PMID: 25158717BACKGROUNDRoper JA, Williamson RC, Bally B, Cowell CAM, Brooks R, Stephens P, Harrison AJ, Bass MD. Ultrasonic Stimulation of Mouse Skin Reverses the Healing Delays in Diabetes and Aging by Activation of Rac1. J Invest Dermatol. 2015 Nov;135(11):2842-2851. doi: 10.1038/jid.2015.224. Epub 2015 Jun 16.
PMID: 26079528BACKGROUNDButcher G, Pinnuck L. Wound bed preparation: ultrasonic-assisted debridement. Br J Nurs. 2013 Mar 28-Apr 10;22(6):S36, S38-43. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2013.22.Sup4.S36.
PMID: 23587975BACKGROUNDMichailidis L, Bergin SM, Haines TP, Williams CM. A Systematic Review to Compare the Effect of Low-frequency Ultrasonic Versus Nonsurgical Sharp Debridement on the Healing Rate of Chronic Diabetes-related Foot Ulcers. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2018 Sep;64(9):39-46.
PMID: 30256750BACKGROUNDMichailidis L, Bergin SM, Haines TP, Williams CM. Healing rates in diabetes-related foot ulcers using low frequency ultrasonic debridement versus non-surgical sharps debridement: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Res Notes. 2018 Oct 16;11(1):732. doi: 10.1186/s13104-018-3841-4.
PMID: 30326972BACKGROUNDMessa CA 4th, Chatman BC, Rhemtulla IA, Broach RB, Mauch JT, D'Angelantonio AM 3rd, Fischer JP. Ultrasonic debridement management of lower extremity wounds: retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and cost. J Wound Care. 2019 May 1;28(Sup5):S30-S40. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2019.28.Sup5.S30.
PMID: 31067172BACKGROUND
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Limitations and Caveats
Future trials may also evaluate efficiency or cost-effectiveness of both treatments
Results Point of Contact
- Title
- Dr. Francisco Javier Álvaro Afonso
- Organization
- Diabetic Foot Unit, Clínica Universitaria de Podología, Facultad de Enfermería, Fisioterapia y Podología, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Lázaro Martinez, Professor
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Publication Agreements
- PI is Sponsor Employee
- No
- Restrictive Agreement
- No
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Prof.Dr
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
October 30, 2020
First Posted
November 18, 2020
Study Start
November 1, 2017
Primary Completion
November 1, 2018
Study Completion
December 31, 2019
Last Updated
July 14, 2021
Results First Posted
July 14, 2021
Record last verified: 2021-06
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share