Dataset Information

Lyopreserved amniotic membrane is cellularly and clinically similar to cryopreserved construct for treating foot ulcers.

ABSTRACT: We compared cellular viability between cryopreserved and lyopreserved amniotic membranes and clinical outcomes of the lyopreserved construct in a prospective cohort study of 40 patients with neuropathic foot ulcers. Patients received weekly application of lyopreserved membrane for 12 weeks with standard weekly debridement and offloading. We evaluated the proportion of foot ulcers that closed, time to closure, closure trajectories, and infection during therapy. We used chi-square tests for dichotomous variables and independent t-tests for continuous variables with an alpha of α = .10. Cellular viability was equivalent between cryo- and lyopreserved amniotic tissues. Clinically, 48% of subjects' wounds closed in an average of 40.0 days. Those that did not close were older (63 vs 59 years, P = .011) and larger ulcers at baseline (7.8 vs 1.6 cm² , P = .012). Significantly more patients who achieved closure reached a 50% wound area reduction in 4 weeks compared with non-closed wounds (73.7% vs 47.6%, P = .093). There was no difference in the slope of the wound closure trajectories between closed and non-closed wounds (0.124 and 0.159, P = .85), indicating the rate of closure was similar. The rate of closure was 0.60 mm/day (SD = 0.47) for wounds that closed and 0.50 mm/day (SD = 0.58) for wounds that did not close (P = .89).

SUBMITTER: Davis KE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7754413 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIt has been reported that ozone therapy might be helpful in treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus (DM).ObjectivesTo assess the effects of ozone therapy on the healing of foot ulcers in people with DM.Search methodsIn March 2015 we searched: The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Ovid EMBASE, EBSCO CINAHL, Science Citation Index, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database and The Chinese Clinical Registry. There were no restrictions based on language, date or study setting.Selection criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ozone therapy with sham ozone therapy or any other interventions for foot ulcers in people with DM, irrespective of publication date or language.Data collection and analysisTwo reviewers independently screened all retrieved citations, selected relevant citations and extracted data. Disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third reviewer. The methodological quality of included studies and the evidence level of outcomes were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach respectively. Data were expressed using risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes with their 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Review Manager (RevMan) software was used to analyse the data.Main resultsThree studies (212 participants) were included in this review. The overall risk of bias was high for two trials and unclear for one.One trial (101 participants) compared ozone treatment with antibiotics for foot ulcers in people with DM. The study had a follow-up period of 20 days. This study showed that ozone treatment was associated with a greater reduction in ulcer area from baseline to the end of the study than treatment with antibiotics (MD -20.54 cm(2), 95% CI -20.61 to -20.47), and a shorter duration of hospitalisation (MD -8.00 days, 95% CI -14.17 to -1.83), but did not appear to affect the number of ulcers healed over 20 days (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.40). No side effects were observed in either group.The other two trials (111 participants) compared ozone treatment plus usual care with usual care for foot ulcers in people with DM. The meta-analysis results did not show evidence of a difference between groups for the outcomes of reduction of ulcer area (MD -2.11 cm(2), 95% CI -5.29 to 1.07), the number of ulcers healed (RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.17), adverse events (RR 2.27, 95% CI 0.48 to 10.79), or amputation rate (RR 2.73, 95%CI 0.12, 64.42).Authors' conclusionsThe available evidence was three small RCTs with unclear methodology, so we are unable to draw any firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of ozone therapy for foot ulcers in people with DM.

Project description:IntroductionDiabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are complex chronic wounds which have a major long-term impact on the morbidity, mortality and quality of patients. The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and time sensitivity of human amnion/chorion membrane treatment in patients with chronic DFUs.MethodsThe Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase and Web of Science databases were systematically searched to identify relevant articles up to 10 April 2017. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing human amnion/chorion membrane + standard therapy and standard therapy alone in patients with DFUs were included in the analysis. Eligible studies were reviewed and data extracted into standard form. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias was used. Review manager version 5.3 software was used for statistical analysis. Data were analyzed using a random effect model.ResultsOverall, the initial search of the four databases identified 352 published studies; of these, seven RCTS were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. The overall test effect in the group assessed at 4 weeks was Z = 4.14 [P < 0.0001; odds ratio (OR) 0.05; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01-0.21]. The overall test effect in the group assessed at 6 weeks was Z = 4.28 (P < 0.0001; OR 0.07; 95% CI 0.02-0.23). The overall effect in the group assessed at 12 weeks was Z = 4.96 (P < 0.00001; OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.04-0.24. The results showed that patients receiving amniotic membrane + standard therapy had far fewer incomplete healing wounds than those receiving standard of care alone. Assessment of the wound healing state at 4 and 6 weeks revealed that the wound healing state was almost the same, but there was a net difference of wound healing state at 12 weeks.ConclusionHuman amnion/chorion membrane + standard of care treatment heals DFUs significantly faster than standard of care alone. When using the amnion in patients with DFUs, the optimal times to assess progress in wound healing should be 4 and 12 weeks.

Project description:BackgroundFor hallux rigidus, dorsal cheilectomy remains a treatment option even with advances in interposition techniques and devices. Cheilectomy aims to alleviate dorsal impingement and improve pain and function as well as range of motion. Cryopreserved umbilical cord allograft, with properties to mitigate inflammation and scar formation, has theoretical benefit for improving outcomes following cheilectomy. In this first prospective randomized and blinded cheilectomy study reported, we aimed to compare outcomes between cheilectomy alone and cheilectomy with umbilical cord allograft.MethodsPatients were randomized to cheilectomy alone (CA) or cheilectomy with cryopreserved umbilical cord (ie, amniotic membrane-umbilical cord [AM-UC]). Patients were evaluated with American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS), Foot Function Index (FFI), and visual analog scale (VAS) pain outcomes collected preoperatively and at 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. In addition, radiographic range of motion data were collected using stress radiographs. Fifty-one patients (26 AM-UC, 25 CA) completed the study, with 5 bilateral surgeries in the AM-UC group and 2 in the CA group, totaling 31 and 27 feet, respectively.ResultsThe AM-UC group had statistically significant improved AOFAS and FFI scores at 1 year compared with the CA group, but there was no difference at 6 months. There was no significant difference between groups for VAS-pain scores at any time point, but overall VAS-pain improved in both groups from preoperative values. There was no significant difference in range of motion (total arc) between groups and changes in range of motion (total arc) in both groups from preoperative to 1 year postoperative were small.ConclusionWe present the results of the first randomized and blinded prospective study of cheilectomy surgery patients. When appropriately selected, cheilectomy remains a good option for patients with symptomatic hallux rigidus. Cryopreserved umbilical cord is a potential adjuvant to cheilectomy, with 1-year results showing improvements in functional outcome scores.Level of evidenceLevel II, prospective comparative study.

Dataset Information

Lyopreserved amniotic membrane is cellularly and clinically similar to cryopreserved construct for treating foot ulcers.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets