DIFFERENCE IN TREATMENT OF FOOT ULCERATIONS IN BOSTON, USA AND PISA, ITALY

Citation
Rg. Frykberg et al., DIFFERENCE IN TREATMENT OF FOOT ULCERATIONS IN BOSTON, USA AND PISA, ITALY, Diabetes research and clinical practice, 35(1), 1997, pp. 21-26
Citations number
22
Categorie Soggetti
Gastroenterology & Hepatology","Endocrynology & Metabolism
ISSN journal
01688227
Volume
35
Issue
1
Year of publication
1997
Pages
21 - 26
Database
ISI
SICI code
0168-8227(1997)35:1<21:DITOFU>2.0.ZU;2-M
Abstract
Primary care of the diabetic patient with foot ulcer can be provided b y medically or surgically trained practitioners. We have prospectively followed 90 sequential patients with newly developed foot ulcers from two major centers, one in the USA where the primary doctor was a podi atrist and one in Europe with a diabetologist. Thirty-four patients fr om Boston and 56 from Pisa (mean age, 55.6; range, 26-75 years; vs. 66 .5; range, 35-94; P < 0.001), matched for sex, weight, type, duration of diabetes, renal impairment and retinopathy took part. Boston patien ts had more severe neuropathy, assessed with clinical examination util izing a neuropathy disability score (NDS) (16 +/- 6 vs. 6 +/- 3 (mean +/- S.D.) P < 0.001) and vibration perception threshold (46 +/- 8 vs. 35 +/- 12 V; P < 0.001) while no difference existed in the number of p atients with clinical infection, a history of lower extremity by-pass operation (6 (18%) vs. 3 (5%); P = NS) and in the size and the severit y of the ulcer, according to the Wagner classification. Initial treatm ent was similar in both centers with emphasis on outpatient ulcer debr idement, pressure relieving foot-wear and topical wound care. Hospital ization was needed in five (15%) Boston and 12 (21%) Pisa patients (P = NS) while surgery was performed on five (15%) Boston and 16 (29%) Pi sa patients (P = NS). The in-hospital stay was similar in both centers (1.4 +/- 4.4 vs. 2.1 +/- 5.9 days; P = NS). The most common operation s in both centers were incision, drainage and bone debridement. Ulcers healed in all patients but the amount of healing time was shorter in Boston patients (6.7 +/- 4.2 vs. 10.5 +/- 6.5 weeks; P < 0.02). We con clude that despite the differences in the two systems similar success rates were achieved in the two centers while a more surgically oriente d strategy may have resulted in a slightly shorter healing time. (C) 1 997 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd.