-
Diabetes Care Oct 2022Different waveforms of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) have now been evaluated for the management of painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). However, no direct or indirect... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Different waveforms of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) have now been evaluated for the management of painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN). However, no direct or indirect comparison between SCS waveforms has been performed to date.
PURPOSE
To conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of SCS for PDN.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, and WikiStim were searched from inception until December 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of SCS for PDN were included.
DATA EXTRACTION
Pain intensity, proportion of patients achieving at least a 50% reduction in pain intensity, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data were extracted.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Significant reductions in pain intensity were observed for low-frequency SCS (LF-SCS) (mean difference [MD] -3.13 [95% CI -4.19 to -2.08], moderate certainty) and high-frequency SCS (HF-SCS) (MD -5.20 [95% CI -5.77 to -4.63], moderate certainty) compared with conventional medical management (CMM) alone. There was a significantly greater reduction in pain intensity on HF-SCS compared with LF-SCS (MD -2.07 [95% CI -3.26 to -0.87], moderate certainty). Significant differences were observed for LF-SCS and HF-SCS compared with CMM for the outcomes proportion of patients with at least 50% pain reduction and HRQoL (very low to moderate certainty). No significant differences were observed between LF-SCS and HF-SCS (very low to moderate certainty).
LIMITATIONS
Limited number of RCTs and no head-to-head RCTs conducted.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings confirm the pain relief and HRQoL benefits of the addition of SCS to CMM for patients with PDN. However, in the absence of head-to-head RCT evidence, the relative benefits of HF-SCS compared with LF-SCS for patients with PDN remain uncertain.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus; Diabetic Neuropathies; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Pain; Pain Measurement; Spinal Cord Stimulation
PubMed: 36150057
DOI: 10.2337/dc22-0932 -
Diabetes/metabolism Research and Reviews Mar 2020Offloading interventions are commonly used in clinical practice to heal foot ulcers. The aim of this updated systematic review is to investigate the effectiveness of...
BACKGROUND
Offloading interventions are commonly used in clinical practice to heal foot ulcers. The aim of this updated systematic review is to investigate the effectiveness of offloading interventions to heal diabetic foot ulcers.
METHODS
We updated our previous systematic review search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to also include original studies published between July 29, 2014 and August 13, 2018 relating to four offloading intervention categories in populations with diabetic foot ulcers: (a) offloading devices, (b) footwear, (c) other offloading techniques, and (d) surgical offloading techniques. Outcomes included ulcer healing, plantar pressure, ambulatory activity, adherence, adverse events, patient-reported measures, and cost-effectiveness. Included controlled studies were assessed for methodological quality and had key data extracted into evidence and risk of bias tables. Included non-controlled studies were summarised on a narrative basis.
RESULTS
We identified 41 studies from our updated search for a total of 165 included studies. Six included studies were meta-analyses, 26 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 13 other controlled studies, and 120 non-controlled studies. Five meta-analyses and 12 RCTs provided high-quality evidence for non-removable knee-high offloading devices being more effective than removable offloading devices and therapeutic footwear for healing plantar forefoot and midfoot ulcers. Total contact casts (TCCs) and non-removable knee-high walkers were shown to be equally effective. Moderate-quality evidence exists for removable knee-high and ankle-high offloading devices being equally effective in healing, but knee-high devices have a larger effect on reducing plantar pressure and ambulatory activity. Low-quality evidence exists for the use of felted foam and surgical offloading to promote healing of plantar forefoot and midfoot ulcers. Very limited evidence exists for the efficacy of any offloading intervention for healing plantar heel ulcers, non-plantar ulcers, and neuropathic ulcers with infection or ischemia.
CONCLUSION
Strong evidence supports the use of non-removable knee-high offloading devices (either TCC or non-removable walker) as the first-choice offloading intervention for healing plantar neuropathic forefoot and midfoot ulcers. Removable offloading devices, either knee-high or ankle-high, are preferred as second choice over other offloading interventions. The evidence bases to support any other offloading intervention is still weak and more high-quality controlled studies are needed in these areas.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Foot; Disease Management; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Practice Patterns, Physicians'; Prognosis
PubMed: 32176438
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.3275 -
Scientific Reports Jan 2021Studies have suggested that hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is effective in the healing of diabetic foot ulcer (DFU); however, there is a lack of consensus. Therefore,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Studies have suggested that hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is effective in the healing of diabetic foot ulcer (DFU); however, there is a lack of consensus. Therefore, to assess the efficacy of HBOT on diabetic foot ulcer among diabetic patients, controlled clinical trials were searched through PubMed, EMBASE, Clinical key, Ovid Discovery, ERMED, Clinical Trials.gov databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and other sources until 15 September 2020. Studies that evaluated the effect of HBOT on diabetic foot ulcer, complete healing, amputation, adverse events, ulcer reduction area, and mortality rate were included. Of 1984 study records screened, 14 studies (768 participants) including twelve RCTs, and two CCTs were included as per inclusion criteria. The results with pooled analysis have shown that HBOT was significantly effective in complete healing of diabetic foot ulcer (OR = 0.29; 95% CI 0.14-0.61; I = 62%) and reduction of major amputation (RR = 0.60; 95% CI 0.39-0.92; I = 24%). Although, it was not effective for minor amputations (RR = 0.82; 95% CI 0.34-1.97; I = 79%); however, less adverse events were reported in standard treatment group (RR = 1.68; 95% CI 1.07-2.65; I = 0%). Nevertheless, reduction in mean percentage of ulcer area and mortality rate did not differ in HBOT and control groups. This review provides an evidence that hyperbaric oxygen therapy is effective as an adjunct treatment measure for the diabetes foot ulcers. These findings could be generalized cautiously by considering methodological flaws within all studies.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic; Diabetic Foot; Humans; Hyperbaric Oxygenation; Publication Bias; Risk; Treatment Outcome; Wound Healing
PubMed: 33500533
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-81886-1 -
Diabetes/metabolism Research and Reviews Mar 2020Prevention of foot ulcers in patients with diabetes is important to help reduce the substantial burden on both patient and health resources. A comprehensive analysis of...
Prevention of foot ulcers in patients with diabetes is important to help reduce the substantial burden on both patient and health resources. A comprehensive analysis of reported interventions is needed to better inform healthcare professionals about effective prevention. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the effectiveness of interventions to help prevent both first and recurrent foot ulcers in persons with diabetes who are at risk for this complication. We searched the available medical scientific literature in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane databases for original research studies on preventative interventions. We screened trial registries for additional studies not found in our search and unpublished trials. Two independent reviewers assessed data from controlled studies for methodological quality, and extracted and presented this in evidence and risk of bias tables. From the 13,490 records screened, 35 controlled studies and 46 non-controlled studies were included. Few controlled studies, which were of generally low to moderate quality, were identified on the prevention of a first foot ulcer. For the prevention of recurrent plantar foot ulcers, there is benefit for the use of daily foot skin temperature measurements, and for therapeutic footwear with demonstrated plantar pressure relief, provided it is consistently worn by the patient. For prevention of ulcer recurrence, there is some evidence for providing integrated foot care, and no evidence for a single session of education.Surgical interventions have been shown effective in selected patients, but the evidence base is small. Foot-related exercises do not appear to prevent a first foot ulcer. A small increase in the level of weight-bearing daily activities does not seem to increase the risk for foot ulceration. The evidence base to support the use of specific self-management and footwear interventions for the prevention of recurrent plantar foot ulcers is quite strong. The evidence is weak for the use of other, sometimes widely applied, interventions, and is practically non-existent for the prevention of a first foot ulcer and non-plantar foot ulcer.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Foot; Disease Management; Humans; Patient Compliance; Patient Education as Topic; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Practice Patterns, Physicians'
PubMed: 31957213
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.3270 -
Diabetes/metabolism Research and Reviews Mar 2024This is the 2023 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot guideline on the prevention of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes, which updates the 2019 guideline....
AIMS
This is the 2023 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot guideline on the prevention of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes, which updates the 2019 guideline. This guideline is targeted at clinicians and other healthcare professionals.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We followed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology to devise clinical questions and critically important outcomes in the PICO format, to conduct a systematic review of the medical-scientific literature including, where appropriate, meta-analyses, and to write recommendations and their rationale. The recommendations are based on the quality of evidence found in the systematic review, expert opinion where (sufficient) evidence was not available, and a weighing of the desirable and undesirable effects of an intervention, as well as patient preferences, costs, equity, feasibility and applicability.
RESULTS
We recommend screening a person with diabetes at very low risk of foot ulceration annually for the loss of protective sensation and peripheral artery disease, and screening persons at higher risk at higher frequencies for additional risk factors. For preventing a foot ulcer, educate persons at-risk about appropriate foot self-care, educate not to walk without suitable foot protection, and treat any pre-ulcerative lesion on the foot. Educate moderate-to-high risk people with diabetes to wear properly fitting, accommodative, therapeutic footwear, and consider coaching them to monitor foot skin temperature. Prescribe therapeutic footwear that has a demonstrated plantar pressure relieving effect during walking, to help prevent plantar foot ulcer recurrence. Consider advising people at low-to-moderate risk to undertake a, preferably supervised, foot-ankle exercise programme to reduce ulcer risk factors, and consider communicating that a total increase in weight-bearing activity of 1000 steps/day is likely safe with regards to risk of ulceration. In people with non-rigid hammertoe with pre-ulcerative lesion, consider flexor tendon tenotomy. We suggest not to use a nerve decompression procedure to help prevent foot ulcers. Provide integrated foot care for moderate-to-high-risk people with diabetes to help prevent (recurrence of) ulceration.
CONCLUSIONS
These recommendations should help healthcare professionals to provide better care for persons with diabetes at risk of foot ulceration, to increase the number of ulcer-free days and reduce the patient and healthcare burden of diabetes-related foot disease.
Topics: Humans; Diabetic Foot; Foot Ulcer; Risk Factors; Evidence-Based Medicine; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 37302121
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.3651 -
Clinical Autonomic Research : Official... Aug 2019Diabetic neuropathy is a common and disabling disorder, and there are currently no proven effective disease-modifying treatments. Physical activity and dietary... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Diabetic neuropathy is a common and disabling disorder, and there are currently no proven effective disease-modifying treatments. Physical activity and dietary interventions in patients with diabetes and diabetic neuropathy have multiple beneficial effects and are generally low risk, which makes lifestyle interventions an attractive treatment option. We reviewed the literature on the effects of physical activity and dietary interventions on length-dependent peripheral neuropathy and cardiac autonomic neuropathy in diabetes.
METHODS
The electronic database PubMed was systematically searched for original human and mouse model studies examining the effect of either dietary or physical activity interventions in subjects with diabetes, prediabetes, or metabolic syndrome.
RESULTS
Twenty studies are included in this review. Fourteen studies were human studies and six were in mice. Studies were generally small with few controlled trials, and there are no widely agreed upon outcome measures.
CONCLUSIONS
Recent research indicates that dietary interventions are effective in modifying diabetic neuropathy in animal models, and there are promising data that they may also ameliorate diabetic neuropathy in humans. It has been known for some time that lifestyle interventions can prevent the development of diabetic neuropathy in type 2 diabetes mellitus subjects. However, there is emerging evidence that lifestyle interventions are effective in individuals with established diabetic neuropathy. In addition to the observed clinical value of lifestyle interventions, there is emerging evidence of effects on biochemical pathways that improve muscle function and affect other organ systems, including the peripheral nerve. However, data from randomized controlled trials are needed.
Topics: Animals; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Neuropathies; Diet, Healthy; Exercise; Humans; Overweight; Risk Reduction Behavior
PubMed: 31076938
DOI: 10.1007/s10286-019-00607-x -
Journal of Diabetes Research 2021Currently, diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is one of the most severe complications of diabetes mellitus (DM). Despite the seriousness of this problem, limited... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Currently, diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is one of the most severe complications of diabetes mellitus (DM). Despite the seriousness of this problem, limited evidence is available on the prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy among patients with diabetes mellitus in Ethiopia. In Ethiopia, there were no updated studies that estimate the national prevalence of DPN. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis provided a national prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy among patients with diabetes mellitus in Ethiopia.
METHODS
This study was submitted for registration with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) in March 2020 and accepted with the registration number CRD42020173831. Different database searching engines were searched online to retrieve related articles, including PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, African Journals Online, World Health Organization (WHO) Afro Library, and Cochrane Review. The reviewers used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guideline in the reviewing process. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, all published and unpublished articles were analyzed. The reviewers used the random effects model to estimate the pooled prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy among diabetes mellitus patients. The reviewers conducted the statistical analysis using the R version 3.5.3 and RStudio version 1.2.5033 software for Windows. The reviewers evaluated the heterogeneity across the included studies by the inconsistency index ( ). The reviewers examined the publication bias by the funnel plot.
RESULTS
The search of the databases produced 245 papers. After checking the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 38 articles with 14029 total patients with diabetes mellitus were found suitable for the review. Except for three (retrospective cohort study), all studies were cross-sectional. The overall pooled prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy was 22% (95% CI 18% to 26%). The subgroup analysis of diabetic peripheral neuropathy among patients with diabetes in the different regions was 23% (95% CI 17% to 29%) in Addis Ababa, 27% (95% CI 16% to 38%) in Oromia, 16% (95% CI 14% to 18%) in South nation and nationalities, and 15% (95% CI 6% to 24%) in Amhara.
CONCLUSIONS
More than one-fifth of patients with diabetes have diabetic peripheral neuropathy. According to this study, the prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy in Ethiopia is considerably high. This evidence suggests that attention should be given to patients with diabetes in monitoring patients' blood glucose.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Neuropathies; Ethiopia; Humans; Prevalence
PubMed: 33628833
DOI: 10.1155/2021/5304124 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2017People with diabetes mellitus (DM) sometimes present with acute or subacute, progressive, asymmetrical pain and weakness of the proximal lower limb muscles. The various... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
People with diabetes mellitus (DM) sometimes present with acute or subacute, progressive, asymmetrical pain and weakness of the proximal lower limb muscles. The various names for the condition include diabetic amyotrophy, diabetic lumbosacral radiculoplexus neuropathies, diabetic femoral neuropathy or Bruns-Garland syndrome. Some studies suggest that diabetic amyotrophy may be an immune-mediated inflammatory microvasculitis causing ischaemic damage of the nerves. Immunotherapies would therefore be expected to be beneficial. This is the second update of a review first published in 2009.
OBJECTIVES
To review the evidence from randomised trials for the efficacy of any form of immunotherapy in the treatment of diabetic amyotrophy.
SEARCH METHODS
On 5 September 2016 we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase. We also contacted authors of relevant publications and other experts to obtain additional references, unpublished trials, and ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We intended to include all randomised and quasi-randomised trials of any immunotherapy in participants with the condition fulfilling all the following: diabetes mellitus as defined by internationally recognised criteria; acute or subacute onset of pain and lower motor neuron weakness involving predominantly the proximal muscles of the lower limbs; weakness that is not confined to one nerve or nerve root distribution; and exclusion of other causes of lumbosacral radiculopathies and plexopathy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently examined all references retrieved by the search to select those meeting the inclusion criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
We found only one completed placebo-controlled trial (N = 75) using intravenous methylprednisolone in diabetic amyotrophy (Dyck 2006). The results have not been fully published and were not available for analysis. The risk of bias was unclear because there was too little information to make a judgement, but we considered the trial at high risk of selective reporting. The published abstract did not report adverse events. We found no additional trials when the searches were updated in September 2016.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is presently no evidence from randomised trials to support a positive or negative effect of any immunotherapy in the treatment in diabetic amyotrophy.
Topics: Diabetic Neuropathies; Humans; Immunotherapy; Injections, Intravenous; Methylprednisolone; Neuroprotective Agents
PubMed: 28746752
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006521.pub4 -
Diabetes/metabolism Research and Reviews Mar 2024This publication represents a scheduled update of the 2019 guidelines of the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) addressing the use of systems to...
BACKGROUND
This publication represents a scheduled update of the 2019 guidelines of the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) addressing the use of systems to classify foot ulcers in people with diabetes in routine clinical practice. The guidelines are based on a systematic review of the available literature that identified 28 classifications addressed in 149 articles and, subsequently, expert opinion using the GRADE methodology.
METHODS
First, we have developed a list of classification systems considered as being potentially adequate for use in a clinical setting, through the summary of judgements for diagnostic tests, focussing on the usability, accuracy and reliability of each system to predict ulcer-related complications as well as use of resources. Second, we have determined, following group debate and consensus, which of them should be used in specific clinical scenarios. Following this process, in a person with diabetes and a foot ulcer we recommend: (a) for communication among healthcare professionals: to use the SINBAD (Site, Ischaemia, Bacterial infection, Area and Depth) system (first option) or consider using WIfI (Wound, Ischaemia, foot Infection) system (alternative option, when the required equipment and level of expertise is available and it is considered feasible) and in each case the individual variables that compose the systems should be described rather than a total score; (b) for predicting the outcome of an ulcer in a specific individual: no existing system could be recommended; (c) for characterising a person with an infected ulcer: the use of the IDSA/IWGDF classification (first option) or consider using the WIfI system (alternative option, when the required equipment and level of expertise is available and it is considered as feasible); (d) for characterising a person with peripheral artery disease: consider using the WIfI system as a means to stratify healing likelihood and amputation risk; (e) for the audit of outcome(s) of populations: the use of the SINBAD score.
CONCLUSIONS
For all recommendations made using GRADE, the certainty of evidence was judged, at best, as being low. Nevertheless, based on the rational application of current data this approach allowed the proposal of recommendations, which are likely to have clinical utility.
Topics: Humans; Diabetic Foot; Ulcer; Reproducibility of Results; Foot Ulcer; Ischemia; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 37179483
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.3648 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2023Vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGFs, including VEGF-A, VEGF-B, VEGF-C, VEGF-D and PLGF) have important roles in the development and function of the peripheral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGFs, including VEGF-A, VEGF-B, VEGF-C, VEGF-D and PLGF) have important roles in the development and function of the peripheral nervous system. Studies have confirmed that VEGFs, especially VEGF-A (so called VEGF) may be associated with the diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) process. However, different studies have shown inconsistent levels of VEGFs in DPN patients. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the relationship between cycling levels of VEGFs and DPN.
METHODS
This study searched 7 databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP Database, WanFang Database, and Chinese Biomedical Literature (CBM), to find the target researches. The random effects model was used to calculate the overall effect.
RESULTS
14 studies with 1983 participants were included, among which 13 studies were about VEGF and 1 was VEGF-B, so only the effects of VEGF were pooled. The result showed that there were obviously increased VEGF levels in DPN patients compared with diabetic patients without DPN (SMD:2.12[1.34, 2.90], <0.00001) and healthy people (SMD:3.50[2.24, 4.75], <0.00001). In addition, increased circulating VEGF levels were not associated with an increased risk of DPN (OR:1.02[0.99, 1.05], <0.00001).
CONCLUSION
Compared with healthy people and diabetic patients without DPN, VEGF content in the peripheral blood of DPN patients is increased, but current evidence does not support the correlation between VEGF levels and the risk of DPN. This suggests that VEGF may play a role in the pathogenesis and repairment of DPN.
Topics: Humans; Diabetes Mellitus; Diabetic Neuropathies; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor B
PubMed: 37251664
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1169405