The role of surgical debridement in healing of diabetic foot ulcers

A critical question in the treatment of chronic wounds is whether and when debridement is needed. The three most common chronic wounds are the diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), the venous leg ulcer, and the pressure or decubitus ulcer. Surgical debridement, aimed at removing necrotic, devitalized wound bed and wound edge tissue that inhibits healing, is a longstanding standard of care for the treatment of chronic, nonhealing wounds. Debridement encourages healing by converting a chronic nonhealing wound environment into a more responsive acute healing environment. While the rationale for debridement seems logical, the evidence to support its use in enhancing healing is scarce. Currently, there is more evidence in the literature for debridement for DFUs than for venous ulcers and pressure ulcers; however, the studies on which clinicians have based their rationale for debridement in DFUs possess methodologic flaws, small sample sizes, and bias. Thus, further studies are needed to develop clinical evidence for its inclusion in treatment protocols for chronic wounds. Here, the authors review the scientific evidence for debridement of DFUs, the rationale for debridement of DFUs, and the insufficient data supporting debridement for venous ulcers and pressure ulcers.     

Serial surgical debridement: A retrospective study on clinical outcomes in chronic lower extremity wounds

This investigation was conducted to determine if a correlation exists between wound healing outcomes and serial debridement in chronic venous leg ulcers (VLUs) and diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). We retrospectively analyzed the results from two controlled, prospective, randomized pivotal trials of topical wound treatments on 366 VLUs and 310 DFUs over 12 weeks. Weekly wound surface area changes following debridement and 12-week wound closure rates between centers and patients were evaluated. VLUs had a significantly higher median wound surface area reduction following clinical visits with surgical debridement as compared with clinical visits with no surgical debridement (34%, p =0.019). Centers where patients were debrided more frequently were associated with higher rates of wound closure in both clinical studies ( p =0.007 VLU, p =0.015 DFU). Debridement frequency per patient was not statistically correlated to higher rates of wound closure; however, there was some minor evidence of a positive benefit of serial debridement in DFUs (odds ratio—2.35, p =0.069). Our results suggest that frequent debridement of DFUs and VLUs may increase wound healing rates and rates of closure, though there is not enough evidence to definitively conclude a significant effect. Future clinical research in wound care should focus on the relationship between serial surgical wound debridement and improved wound healing outcomes as demonstrated in this study.     

Debridement performance index and its correlation with complete closure of diabetic foot ulcers

In recent years there has been wider acceptance of aggressive surgical debridement as a means to accelerate closure of diabetic foot ulcers. In a clinical trial by Steed et al.1 involving the use of a topically applied growth factor, thorough surgical debridement of surrounding callus, necrotic ulcer bed, and undermined ulcers' edges was associated with greater incidence of healing and effectiveness of the therapeutic agent. However, at present there is no established way to judge the appropriate extent of debridement and its performance. Here we describe a scoring system to assess whether debridement has been performed adequately. Our scoring system consists of the following three categories: debridement of a) callus; b) ulcer's edge undermining; and c) wound bed necrotic tissue. We assigned a score of 0-2 to each of these categories using the following criteria: 0 = debridement needed but not done, 1 = debridement needed and done, and 2 = debridement not needed. These three scores are then added to give a total ranging from 0 to 6, with the highest number being the optimal score. This instrument, the Debridement Performance Index, evaluates both the adequacy of debridement and whether the ulcer has been or is being properly debrided. To initiate the validation of this scoring system and determine its predictive value for wound closure by week 12, we applied it to 143 patients with diabetic foot ulcers who had been treated in a clinical trial involving either standard therapy (n = 65) or the application of a bioengineered skin construct (n = 78). We blindly evaluated sequential digital photographs of each diabetic foot ulcer and applied the Debridement Performance Index score at day 0, before initiation of either treatment. We found that the lower the baseline Debridement Performance Index the lower the incidence of ultimate wound closure by week 12 ( p = 0.0276). Patients with a Debridement Performance Index between 3 and 6 were 2.4 times more likely to heal than those with a score of 0-2. After controlling for treatment, the Debridement Performance Index was found to be an independent predictor of wound closure (odds ratio = 2.4 95% confidence interval = 1.0-5.6). In conclusion, this novel scoring system for debridement performance appears to be very promising as a predictive tool for determining outcome in clinical trials and, most likely, in clinical practice.     

Enzymatic wound debridement

BACKGROUND: Clinical experience and existing research strongly support debridement as a necessary component of wound bed preparation when slough or eschar is present. Multiple techniques are available, but the indications for each technique and their efficacy are not clearly established. There is little evidence to guide the clinician in the selection of a safe, effective debridement method for the patient with a chronic wound. OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify evidence related to the efficacy of enzymatic debriding agents collagenase and papain-urea in the removal of necrotic tissue from the wound bed and its impact on wound healing. SEARCH STRATEGY: A systematic review of electronic databases was undertaken using key words: (1) debridement, (2) enzymatic debridement, (3) collagenases, (4) papain, (5) urea, and (6) papain-urea. All prospective and retrospective studies that compared enzymatic debridement using collagenase or papain-urea (with and without chlorophyllin) on pressure ulcers, leg ulcers, or burn wounds were included in the review. All studies that met inclusion criteria and were published between January 1960 and February 2008 were included. RESULTS: Collagenase ointment is more effective than placebo (inactivated ointment or petrolatum ointment) for debridement of necrotic tissue from pressure ulcers, leg ulcers, and partial-thickness burn wounds. Limited evidence suggests that a papain-urea-based ointment removes necrotic material from pressure ulcers more rapidly than collagenase ointment, but progress toward wound healing appears to be equivocal. Limited evidence suggests that treatment of partial-thickness burn wounds in children with collagenase ointment may require an equivocal time to treatment with surgical excision and that combination treatment may reduce the need for surgical excision. Insufficient evidence was found to determine whether collagenase ointment removes necrotic tissue from leg ulcers more or less rapidly than autolytic debridement enhanced by a polyacrylate dressing. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Enzymatic debriding agents are an effective alternative for removing necrotic material from pressure ulcers, leg ulcers, and partial-thickness wounds. They may be used to debride both adherent slough and eschar. Enzymatic agents may be used as the primary technique for debridement in certain cases, especially when alternative methods such as surgical or conservative sharp wound debridement (CSWD) are not feasible owing to bleeding disorders or other considerations. Many clinicians will select enzymes when CSWD is not an option. Clinical experience strongly suggests that combined therapy, such as initial surgical debridement followed by serial debridement using an enzymatic agent or enzymatic debridement along with serial CSWD, is effective for many patients with chronic, indolent, or nonhealing wounds.     

Initial report of the use of an injectable porcine collagen-derived matrix to stimulate healing of diabetic foot wounds in humans

A novel injectable scaffolding matrix (E-Matrix) has been developed to accelerate wound healing in diabetic foot ulcers. This porcine collagen-derived matrix is designed to mimic tertiary embryonic connective tissue and to stimulate fetal wound repair mechanisms including angiogenesis. In vitro and animal studies have indicated a beneficial effect on tissue growth and an acceptable safety profile. In this report, we describe the initial use of this product in a pilot study of six humans with chronic nonhealing diabetic foot ulcers. A dramatic initial response to injection was seen, with an average wound size reduction of 72% 2 weeks after injection. Randomized trials are underway to define the potential benefit of this new treatment modality for diabetic foot ulcers.     

Buried chip skin grafting in neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers following vacuum-assisted wound bed preparation: enhancing a classic surgical tool with novel technologies

In patients with diabetes mellitus, complications such as polyneuropathy and peripheral angiopathy inevitably lead to diabetic foot complications including foot ulcers, gangrene, and osteoarthropathy. These conditions necessitate minor or major amputation as part of treatment. In patients with Charcot's arthropathy and predominant neuropathy, recurrent foot ulcers are common in areas of high pressure. Such high pressure is caused by the degrading of the architecture of the foot and inadequate footwear. These patients are a clinical challenge. A select group of such patients may benefit from free surgical tissue transfer, though free or local flap surgery is often difficult or even impossible owing to an impaired arterial circulation. In such wounds, surgical debridement followed by skin grafts often fail due to bacterial burden in the wounds. To circumvent these problems, the authors developed a therapeutic approach using buried chip skin grafting to close granulation wound beds in diabetic feet. Locally applied vacuum therapy (VAC) for wound bed preparation of chronic, nonresponsive foot ulcers and subsequent grafting using the burying technique with a minute fraction of skin was used. Firm closure was achieved. The closed wound was resistant to mechanical irritation.     

New techniques for wound debridement

Debridement is a crucial component of wound management. Traditionally, several types of wound debridement techniques have been used in clinical practice such as autolytic, enzymatic, biodebridement, mechanical, conservative sharp and surgical. Various factors determine the method of choice for debridement for a particular wound such as suitability to the patient, the type of wound, its anatomical location and the extent of debridement required. Recently developed products are beginning to challenge traditional techniques that are currently used in wound bed preparation. The purpose of this review was to critically evaluate the current evidence behind the use of these newer techniques in clinical practice. There is some evidence to suggest that low frequency ultrasound therapy may improve healing rates in patients with venous ulcers and diabetic foot ulcers. Hydrosurgery debridement is quick and precise, but the current evidence is limited and further studies are underway. Debridement using a monofilament polyester fibre pad and plasma‐mediated bipolar radiofrequency ablation are both very new techniques. The initial evidence is limited, and further studies are warranted to confirm their role in management of chronic wounds.     

Healing of diabetic foot ulcers and pressure ulcers with human skin equivalent: a new paradigm in wound healing

HYPOTHESIS: In patients with diabetic foot and pressure ulcers, early intervention with biological therapy will either halt progression or result in rapid healing of these chronic wounds. DESIGN: In a prospective nonrandomized case series, 23 consecutive patients were treated with human skin equivalent (HSE) after excisional debridement of their wounds. SETTING: A single university teaching hospital and tertiary care center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-three consecutive patients with a total of 41 wounds (1.0-7.5 cm in diameter) were treated with placement of HSE after sharp excisional debridement. All patients with pressure ulcers received alternating air therapy with zero-pressure alternating air mattresses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Time to 100% healing, as defined by full epithelialization of the wound and by no drainage from the site. RESULTS: Seven of 10 patients with diabetic foot ulcers had complete healing of all wounds. In these patients 17 of 20 wounds healed in an average of 42 days. Seven of 13 patients with pressure ulcers had complete healing of all wounds. In patients with pressure ulcers, 13 of 21 wounds healed in an average of 29 days. All wounds that did not heal in this series occurred in patients who had an additional stage IV ulcer or a wound with exposed bone. Twenty-nine of 30 wounds that healed did so after a single application of the HSE. CONCLUSIONS: In diabetic ulcers and pressure ulcers of various durations, the application of HSE with the surgical principles used in a traditional skin graft is successful in producing healing. The high success rate with complete closure in these various types of wounds suggests that HSE may function as a reservoir of growth factors that also stimulate wound contraction and epithelialization. If a wound has not fully healed after 6 weeks, a second application of HSE should be used. If the wound is not healing, an occult infection is the likely cause. All nonischemic diabetic foot and pressure ulcers that are identified and treated early with aggressive therapy (including antibiotics, off-loading of pressure, and biological therapy) will not progress.     

Diabetic foot infections: stepwise medical and surgical management

Foot complications are common among diabetic patients; foot ulcers are among the more serious consequences. These ulcers frequently become infected, with potentially disastrous progression to deeper spaces and tissues. If not treated promptly and appropriately, diabetic foot infections can become incurable or even lead to septic gangrene, which may require foot amputation. Diagnosing infection in a diabetic foot ulcer is based on clinical signs and symptoms of inflammation. Properly culturing an infected lesion can disclose the pathogens and provide their antibiotic susceptibilities. Specimens for culture should be obtained after wound debridement to avoid contamination and optimise identification of pathogens. Staphylococcus aureus is the most common isolate in these infections; the increasing incidence of methicillin-resistant S. aureus over the past two decades has further complicated antibiotic treatment. While chronic infections are often polymicrobial, many acute infections in patients not previously treated with antibiotics are caused by a single pathogen, usually a gram-positive coccus. We offer a stepwise approach to treating diabetic foot infections. Most patients must first be medically stabilised and any metabolic aberrations should be addressed. Antibiotic therapy is not required for uninfected wounds but should be carefully selected for all infected lesions. Initial therapy is usually empirical but may be modified according to the culture and sensitivity results and the patient's clinical response. Surgical intervention is usually required in cases of retained purulence or advancing infection despite optimal medical therapy. Possible additional indications for surgical procedures include incision and drainage of an abscess, debridement of necrotic material, removal of any foreign bodies, arterial revascularisation and, when needed, amputation. Most foot ulcers occur on the plantar surface of the foot, thus requiring a plantar incision for any drainage procedure.     

Graftskin Treatment of Difficult to Heal Diabetic Foot Ulcers: One Center''s Experience

BACKGROUND: Chronic diabetes-related foot ulcers result from predisposition, tissue injury, and inadequate reparative mechanisms. Standard care for diabetes-related foot ulcers includes weight off-loading, pressure-relieving footwear, aggressive surgical debridement, and frequent dressing changes. Graftskin is a recently developed living skin construct. OBJECTIVE: To compare Graftskin and standardized wound care to standardized wound care alone in the treatment of difficult to heal diabetes-related neuropathic foot ulcers, and to assess the handling and application characteristics of Graftskin. METHODS: A university dermatology clinic was part of a 24-center prospective, randomized, controlled, parallel group comparative trial of Graftskin for the treatment of difficult to heal neuropathic diabetes-related foot ulcers. Patients were randomly assigned to treatment with Graftskin with aggressive debridement and standardized wound care, or aggressive debridement and standardized wound care alone. Blinding was not feasible due to device visibility during application. RESULTS: Five of nine patients (56%) treated with Graftskin therapy had complete healing. Three of eight control patients (37%) had complete healing. CONCLUSION: Graftskin as an adjunct to aggressive debridement and standardized wound care appears to be a valuable treatment adjunct in patients with difficult to heal diabetes-related neuropathic foot ulcers. The application learning curve was steep and the ease of application exceptional.     

Autologous fibroblasts to treat deep and complicated leg ulcers in diabetic patients

Large complicated leg ulcers, not responsive to standard therapy, after surgical debridement and under parenteral specific antibiosis, must be occlusively covered to improve wound healing. In 10 diabetic patients with deep (Wagner degree 3), large, and Staphylococcus aureus (n=7) or Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n=5)-infected leg (n=1), or foot (n=9) ulcers, we have applied, as a coverage, meshes of in vitro expanded autologous fibroblasts. Complete ulcer healing was observed in seven patients after 8, 12, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 weeks from the first graft application (Figures 2 and 3). Two patients had >70% wound healing at 20 and 28 weeks after the first treatment. One patient, previously submitted to a bypass vascular procedure, died of acute myocardial infarction 16 weeks after the first fibroblast autograft application and with a healing wound evenly filled with granulation tissue. In our opinion, the application of autologous in vitro expanded fibroblasts is a satisfactory therapeutic option to treat large leg ulcers and is particularly indicated in patients with chronic diseases such as diabetes or autoimmune diseases on steroid treatment.     

Early healing rates and wound area measurements are reliable predictors of later complete wound closure

This study was undertaken to determine if healing rates are reliable early predictors of ultimate complete wound closure in venous leg ulcers and diabetic foot wounds. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 306 venous leg ulcers and 241 diabetic foot ulcers enrolled in two large controlled, prospective, randomized pivotal trials to compare topical wound treatments, to determine whether certain early markers of healing could be correlated with later total wound closure. Two-sided tests at 95% confidence demonstrated that wound margin advance, initial healing rate, percent wound surface area reduction, and wound healing trajectories (all p <0.001) were powerful predictors of complete wound healing at 12 weeks. Wounds with poor healing progress by these criteria at 4 weeks were highly likely to remain unhealed after 8 additional weeks of treatment. Analysis of the diabetic foot ulcers and venous leg ulcers subgroups separately demonstrated consistent statistical test results with high significance; similarly, the results remained valid independent of the topical treatment used. The early prediction of eventual wound healing or nonhealing using early healing rates may enable more efficient triage of patients to advanced healing technologies. We believe that these surrogate markers are robust predictors of healing regardless of wound etiology and that they merit wider use in clinical trials and routine patient care.     

Diabetic foot ulcers: A devastating complication of diabetes mellitus continues non-stop in spite of new medical treatment modalities

Diabetic foot ulcer is a devastating complication of diabetes mellitus and significant cause of mortality and morbidity all over the world and can be complex and costly. The development of foot ulcer in a diabetic patient has been estimated to be 19%-34% through their lifetime. The pathophysiology of diabetic foot ulcer consist of neuropathy, trauma and, in many patients, additional peripheral arterial disease. In particular, diabetic neuropathy leads to foot deformity, callus formation, and insensitivity to trauma or pressure. The standard algorithms in diabetic foot ulcer management include assessing the ulcer grade classification, surgical debridement, dressing to facilitate wound healing, off-loading, vascular assessment (status and presence of a chance for interventional vascular correction), and infection and glycemic control. Although especially surgical procedures are sometimes inevitable, they are poor predictive factors for the prognosis of diabetic foot ulcer. Different novel treatment modalities such as nonsurgical debridement agents, oxygen therapies, and negative pressure wound therapy, topical drugs, cellular bioproducts, human growth factors, energy-based therapies, and systematic therapies have been available for patients with diabetic foot ulcer. However, it is uncertain whether they are effective in terms of promoting wound healing related with a limited number of randomized controlled trials. This review aims at evaluating diabetic foot ulcer with regard to all aspects. We will also focus on conventional and novel adjunctive therapy in diabetic foot management.     

The debridement of hard to heal leg ulcers by means of a new device based on Fluidjet technology

Debridement plays an essential role in the wound-bed preparation of necrotic and sloughy ulcers, being a mandatory step to achieve a well-debrided bed, proceeding towards healing. This study reports our experience with Versajet [Versajet Hydrosurgery System (Smith & Nephew, Hull, UK)], a new device for the debridement of exudating ulcers, based on Fluidjet technology, which excises and aspirates the unwanted tissue by using the Venturi effect. In a 10-month time period, a total of 68 patients, out of a setting of 167 patients, hospitalised as affected by chronic, hard-to-heal leg ulcers, stuck in the inflammatory phase, were treated with Versajet. Based on ulcer characteristics and clinical conditions, the remaining 99 patients underwent traditional debridement with moist dressings (controls). In the majority of Versajet-treated cases (46), an adequately debrided wound bed was achieved with one operative procedure; two and three procedures were required in 17 and 5 patients, respectively. Almost all the procedures were performed in the ward at the patient's bedside. This procedure is quick (mean time per treatment is about 5 minutes); when compared with a traditional treatment with moist dressings, Versajet considerably shortens the in-hospital stay and promotes a quicker healing process. When used by an experienced surgeon, Versajet allows a selective debridement, as it makes it possible to remove only the tissue centred in the working end and spare the healthy tissue. Debriding with Versajet is highly effective in reducing the bacterial load of the ulcer bed. The pain caused by Versajet is well tolerated, especially when set for gentle debridement. If multiple treatments are required, the combined use with moist dressings is synergistic, as the dressings soften the necrotic tissue, thus facilitating the following Versajet debridement. The results indicate that Versajet offers more precision than standard mechanical debridement and, at high settings, offers an alternative to surgical debridement.     

The role of a radical surgical debridement and mesh graft tissue transfer for treatment of venous ulcers

Many studies are published demonstrating remarkable results of skin grafting in venous ulcers, but only a few controlled randomised trials including a low number of patients are available. A review based on two controlled randomised trials concludes that there is no significant benefit for mesh graft tissue transfer compared to standard treatment. However, in all studies no adequate initial radical surgical debridement including fasciectomy for wound bed preparation has been performed. In a prospective study on 57 patients with venous ulceration we found significant lower recurrence rates after mesh graft tissue transfer and radical surgical debridement. In clinical practice the results of mesh graft tissue transfer following surgical debridement in the management of larger chronic venous ulcers have been encouraging, although the evidence-based recommendation is lacking. It may not be the treatment of first choice and should be preserved for large ulcers of long duration or history of recurrence. There is need for more randomised controlled studies comparing also cost effectiveness while ensuring baseline comparability.     

Effectiveness of biofilm‐based wound care system on wound healing in chronic wounds

A biofilm plays a crucial role in delaying wound healing. Sharp debridement, a possible effective method for eliminating biofilms, can only be applied to the wound with visible necrotic tissue; thus, no option has been available for eliminating biofilms that are not accompanied by necrotic tissue. Wound blotting was recently developed to visualize biofilm noninvasively and quickly, and ultrasonic debridement is available for biofilm removal. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of “biofilm‐based wound care system (BWCS),” a combination of wound blotting as a point‐of‐care testing and ultrasonic debridement, for promoting wound healing. Firstly, the cross‐sectional study was conducted to examine the proportion of biofilm removal by ultrasonic debridement in pressure ulcers [Study 1]. Subsequently, the retrospective cohort study was conducted to examine the effectiveness of BWCS for healing of chronic wounds [Study 2]. The proportions of wound healing between wounds treated with BWCS and those with standard care in the home‐visiting clinic were compared by Kaplan–Meier curve, and the Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to assess the effect of BWCS on wound healing. In Study 1, the median of biofilm removal proportion was 38.9% (interquartile range, 12.9–68.0%) for pressure ulcers treated with standard care and 65.2% (41.1–78.8%) for those treated with ultrasonic debridement (p = 0.009). In Study 2, the proportion of wound healing within 90 days was significantly higher in wounds treated with BWCS than in those treated with standard care (p = 0.001). The adjusted hazard ratio of BWCS for wound healing was 4.5 (95% confidence interval, 1.3–15.0; p = 0.015). In conclusion, we demonstrated that our novel approach, BWCS, can be a promising therapeutic strategy for visualizing biofilms that are not accompanied by necrotic tissue and promoting healing in chronic wounds.     

The use of a dermal substitute to preserve maximal foot length in diabetic foot wounds with tendon and bone exposure following urgent surgical debridement for acute infection

In this study, we evaluated the utility of a dermal substitute for preserving maximal foot length after urgent surgical debridement. Patients referred to our Diabetic Foot Center with foot lesions were assessed for sensory–motor neuropathy, infection and critical limb ischaemia. The presence of acute foot infection indicated the need for immediate surgical debridement. The degree of amputation, if necessary, was based on the amount of apparently non infected vital tissue. When vital tendon/bone tissue remained exposed, the lesion was covered with a dermal substitute. From January to December 2008, 393 patients underwent surgical treatment for diabetic foot syndrome; 30 patients underwent immediate surgical debridement resulting in exposed tendon and/or bone tissues. An average of 4·4 ± 2·1 days following surgical debridement, all 30 patients underwent dermal regeneration template grafting to cover‐exposed healthy tendon and bone tissues, instead of achieving primary wound closure with a proximal amputation. After 21 days, a skin graft was performed. Complete wound healing occurred in 26 patients (86·7%). In these patients, the amputation level was significantly more distal (P < 0·003) with respect to that potentially required for immediate wound closure. The average healing time was 74·1 ± 28·9 days. Four patients underwent a more proximal amputation. No patients underwent major amputation. The use of the dermal substitute for treating exposed tendon and bone tissues allowed timely wound healing and preserved maximal foot length. Continued follow‐up will allow assessment of long‐term relapse and complication rates. Such treatment could constitute part of the comprehensive management of diabetic wounds.     

Platelet-rich plasma versus platelet-poor plasma in the management of chronic diabetic foot ulcers: a comparative study

Non healing diabetic foot ulcers and the resulting potential amputations present significant costs to the health care system and reduce patient quality of life. The goal of diabetic foot ulcer treatment is to obtain wound closure as expeditiously as possible. The use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) to enhance wound healing has increased dramatically over the last decade. However, controversies exist in the literature regarding the added benefit of this procedure. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficiency of platelet releasate on the healing of chronic diabetic ulcers in comparison with platelet-poor plasma (PPP). This study included 24 patients with chronic diabetic ulcers. They were systematically randomised into two groups: PRP group (n = 12) and PPP group (n = 12). The results showed that healing in PRP group was significantly faster (P < 0·005). PRP enhances healing of chronic diabetic foot ulcers.     

Hyaluronic acid derivatives and their healing effect on burns,epithelial surgical wounds,and chronic wounds: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

Hyaluronic acid (HA) is a polysaccharide common to most species and is found in many sites in the human body, including the skin and soft tissue. A systematic review of the literature and meta‐analysis was performed to identify randomized controlled trials, evaluating the use of HA derivatives in healing burns, epithelial surgical, and chronic wounds. Nine studies were identified, which met the search criteria and clinical endpoints of complete healing and percent wound size reduction when using HA vs. either an active or passive comparator. It was found in the vast majority of randomized controlled trials (eight of nine) that HA derivatives significantly improved the healing of wounds vs. traditional therapies or placebo (either via complete healing or a significant reduction in wound size) occurring from burns, venous insufficiency, diabetes, neuropathic insufficiency, and surgical removal of the epithelial layer (for tattoo removal). In the other remaining trial, one formulation of HA was compared with another, with the higher concentration showing improved application characteristics. Further, it was found in a meta‐analysis in subsets of patients with diabetic foot ulcers (neuropathic) that HA derivatives healed these types of wounds significantly faster than standard of care. These studies in aggregate show that HA derivatives accelerate the healing process in burns, epithelial surgical wounds, and chronic wounds.     

Enzymatic debridement with collagenase in wounds and ulcers: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Enzymatic debridement with collagenase is a technique that is commonly used in clinical practice. This systematic review examines the effect of collagenase on all kinds of wounds, compared to an alternative therapy, on wound healing, wound bed characteristics, cost‐effectiveness and the occurrence of adverse events. We conducted a systematic literature search on available literature in Cochrane databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL. Two investigators independently assessed the titles and abstracts of all randomised controlled trials obtained involving collagenase of all kinds of wounds based on inclusion criteria. Of the 1411 citations retrieved, 22 studies reported outcomes with the use of collagenase either for wound healing or wound debridement. Results support the use of collagenase for enzymatic debridement in pressure ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers and in conjunction with topical antibiotics for burns. However, studies presented a high risk of bias. Risk ratio of developing an adverse event related to collagenase versus the alternative treatment was statistically significant (for 10 studies, RR: 1·79, 95% CI 1·24–2·59, I²=0%, P = 0·002). There is very limited data on the effect of collagenase as an enzymatic debridement technique on wounds. More independant research and adequate reporting of adverse events are warranted.