Ultrasound Assisted Wound Debridement (UAW) Versus Standard Wound Treatment in Complicated Diabetic Foot Ulcers (DFU)

Diabetic Foot Ulcer Clinical Trial

Official title: 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

Status Completed

Clinical Trial 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.

Clinical Trial Description

2. Methods 2.1. Trial design A randomized and controlled parallel clinical trial was performed involving outpatients with complicated DFU that were admitted to specialized diabetic foot unit between November 2017 to December 2019. The study protocol received full approval from the Ethics Committee of the Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain (C.P. - C.I. 16/484-P). Each patient provided written informed consent before inclusion. 2.1. Intervention Participants were randomized and assigned to receive either surgical debridement or UAW debridement every week during a six-week treatment period. Soft tissue punch biopsies (3mm) were taken after wound debridement sessions at week zero and week six. 2.2. Follow-up Patients were followed-up for 6 months after inclusion. During the follow-up period, the investigators recorded ulcer healing. Ulcer healing was defined as complete epithelialization without any sustained drainage up to 24 weeks after the end of the study follow-up. 2.3. Sample size The sample size was calculated using the Granmo v.12 program (Municipal Institute of Medical Research, Barcelona, Spain) (https://www.imim.cat/ofertadeserveis/software-public/granmo/ ). Therefore, we analyzed 51 patients (24 in surgical group and 27 en UAW group) with an alpha of 0.05 and a statistical power of 0.80. 2.4. Randomization A computer-generated random number table was used to carry out the randomization of the patients into the two groups by an investigator who was blinded to the identity of the participants. 2.5. Blinding None of the participants, care providers, and outcome adjudicators was blinded to the interventions after assignment. 2.6. Statistical Analysis Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS for IOs version 21.0 (SPSS, Inc. Chicago, IL, USA). The assumption of normality of all continuous variables was verified using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Statistical differences between groups were calculated using the Chi-Square test and, where appropriate, Fisher's exact test for categorical variables. The Mann-Whitney U test was performed for abnormally distributed quantitative parameters, and Student's t-test was performed for quantitative variables that were distributed normally. The criteria of p < 0.05 was accepted as statistically significant with a confidence interval of 95%. This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (2013 revision) and followed all local laws and regulations in clinical research investigations in patients. ;

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Diabetic Foot
• Diabetic Foot Ulcer
• Foot Ulcer
• Ulcer

• NCT number: NCT04633642
• Study type: Interventional
• Source: Universidad Complutense de Madrid
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• Start date: November 1, 2017
• Completion date: December 31, 2019