Antibiotic therapy for diabetic foot infections in a tertiary care hospital in Jakarta,Indonesia

AimsThe purpose of this study was to determine the microbiology of diabetic foot infections and to assess the antibiotic susceptibility patterns.Materials and methodsA cross sectional retrospective study of 35 patients with diabetic foot infections hospitalized at the internal medicine clinic of Dr. Mintohardjo Navy Hospital, Jakarta. The data were collected from patient medical records retrospectively. The classification of the diabetic foot infections was evaluated according to Meggit–Wagner's Classification. Identification of causative microorganisms was performed by standard microbiologic methods. Antibiotic susceptibility testing was performed using disk-diffusion method.ResultsDuring January to December 2012, a total of 288 of diabetic patients were admitted to hospital, and 35 patients had diabetic foot infections. According to Meggit–Wagner's classification the most common disease was grade 3 in 31.4% patients, followed by grade 2 in 25.7%, and grade 4 in 17.3% of patients. Conservative diabetic control care was carried out in 37.1% of patients, and surgical intervention was carried out in 62.9% of patients. A total of 59 pathogens were identified. The most common infecting microorganism isolated on pus cultures was Staphylococcus aureus (47.5%), followed by Pseudomonas spp (16.9%), E. coli (10.2%), Streptococcus spp. (8.5%), Enterobacter spp. (7.0%), Proteus spp. (6.7%), and Acinetobacter spp. (3.2%). Overall, 37.2% of the diabetic foot infection caused by a single microorganism, and 62.8% had polymicrobial infections. The most frequently administrated antibiotic was ceftriaxone (40.0%), followed by ciprofloxacin (11.4%), and meropenem (8.6%).ConclusionDiabetic foot infections (62.8%) were polymicrobial. S. aureus was most commonly found in the foot infection. Most of the microorganisms isolated from diabetic foot infection were resistant to many types of antibiotics.     

Conservative surgical approach versus non-surgical management for diabetic neuropathic foot ulcers: a randomized trial

To test the efficacy of surgical treatment of non-infected neuropathic foot ulcers compared to conventional non-surgical management, a group of diabetic outpatients attending our diabetic foot clinic were studied. All patients who came to the clinic for the first time from January to December 1995 inclusive with an uncomplicated neuropathic ulcer were randomized into two groups. Group A received conservative treatment, consisting of relief of weight-bearing, regular dressings; group B underwent surgical excision, eventual debridement or removal of bone segments underlying the lesion and surgical closure. Healing rate, healing time, prevalence of infection, relapse during a 6-month period following intervention and subjective discomfort were assessed. Twenty-four ulcers in 21 patients were treated in group A (17 Type 2 DM/3 Type 1 DM, age 63.24 ± 13.46 yr, duration of diabetes 18.2 ± 8.41 yr, HbA_1c 9.5 ± 3.8%) and 22 ulcers in 21 patients in group B (19 Type 2 DM/2 Type 1 DM, age 65.53 ± 9.87 yr, duration of diabetes 16.84 ± 10.61 yr; HbA_1c 8.9 ± 2.2%). Healing rate was lower (79.2% = 19/24 ulcers) in group A than in group B (95.5% = 21/22 ulcers; p < 0.05), and healing time was longer (128.9 ± 86.60 days vs 46.73 ± 38.94 days; p < 0.001). Infective complications occurred significantly more often in group A patients (3/24, 12.5% vs 1/22, 4.5%; p < 0.05), as did relapses of ulcerations (8 vs 3; p < 0.01). There were only two minor perioperative complications in group B patients. Patients reported a higher degree of satisfaction in group B (p < 0.01) as well as lower discomfort (p < 0.05) and restrictions (p < 0.05). Thus surgical treatment of neuropathic foot ulcers in diabetic patients proved to be an effective approach compared to conventional treatment in terms of healing time, complications, and relapses, and can be safely performed in an outpatient setting. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Health care‐associated pneumonia in haemodialysis patients: Clinical outcomes in patients treated with narrow versus broad spectrum antibiotic therapy

Background and objective: Although the 2005 American Thoracic Society/Infectious Disease Society of America antibiotic guidelines classify pneumonia occurring in patients receiving chronic haemodialysis as health care‐associated pneumonia (HCAP), and thus recommend treatment with broad‐spectrum antibiotics for these patients, little data support this classification. We compared clinical outcomes in haemodialysis patients hospitalized with pneumonia, who were treated with broad‐spectrum antibiotics versus narrow‐spectrum antibiotics. Methods: One hundred twenty‐five haemodialysis patients with pneumonia met eligibility criteria. Categorization into the community‐acquired pneumonia (CAP) group or HCAP group was based on antibiotic therapy patients received. Time to oral therapy, time to clinical stability, length of stay and mortality were compared. Results: CAP and HCAP patients did not differ in Pneumonia Severity Index and Charlson Comorbidity index scores, but HCAP patients were more likely to meet criteria for severe pneumonia. Patients treated with HCAP therapy had a significantly longer time to oral therapy than CAP patients (9.2 vs 3.2 days, P < 0.001) and a significantly longer length of stay (11.9 vs 5.1 days, P < 0.001). Time to clinical stability was marginally longer in the HCAP group (3.1 vs 2.4 days, P = 0.07). Patients treated with HCAP therapy had longer continuation of intravenous antibiotics after reaching clinical stability (5.5 vs 0.78 days, P < 0.001). Conclusions: This study is the first to our knowledge to describe clinical outcomes in patients with haemodialysis as their only HCAP risk factor. Narrow‐spectrum antibiotics may be safe in haemodialysis patients with no other HCAP risk factors. HCAP therapy delayed de‐escalation to oral antibiotics was associated with increased duration of intravenous antibiotics and length of stay.     

Burden of diabetic foot disorders,guidelines for management and disparities in implementation in Europe: a systematic literature review

The study aimed to assess the economic and quality of life burden of diabetic foot disorders and to identify disparities in the recommendations from guidelines and the current clinical practice across the EU5 (Spain, Italy, France, UK and Germany) countries. Literature search of electronic databases (MEDLINE^®, Embase^® and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) was undertaken. English language studies investigating economic and resource burden, quality of life and management of diabetic foot disease in the EU5 countries were included. Additionally, websites were screened for guidelines and current management practices in diabetic foot complication in EU5. Diabetic foot complications accounted for a total annual cost of €509m in the UK and €430 per diabetic patient in Germany, during 2001. The cost of diabetic foot complications increased with disease severity, with hospitalizations (41%) and amputation (9%) incurring 50% of the cost. Medical devices (orthopaedic shoes, shoe lifts and walking aids) were the most frequently utilized resources. Patients with diabetic foot complications experienced worsened quality of life, especially in those undergoing amputations and with non‐healed ulcers or recurrent ulcers. Although guidelines advocate the use of multidisciplinary foot care teams, the utilization of multidisciplinary foot care teams was suboptimal. We conclude that diabetic foot disorders demonstrated substantial economic burden and have detrimental effect on quality of life, with more impairment in physical domain. Implementation of the guidelines and set‐up of multidisciplinary clinics for holistic management of the diabetic foot disorders varies across Europe and remains suboptimal. Hence, guidelines need to be reinforced to prevent diabetic foot complications and to achieve limb salvage if complications are unpreventable. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Comparison of negative pressure wound therapy and moist wound care in patients with diabetic foot ulcers: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background:This study conducted a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of the negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) with the moist wound care (MWC) in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs).Methods:The PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched by 2 of the authors, to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the clinical outcomes of patients treated with NPWT versus MWC for DFUs. Meta-analyses were performed for several outcomes, including wound healing results, amputation or resection incidence, and risk of adverse events, utilizing the “meta” package of R language version 4.0.3.Results:A total of 10 trials (619 patients in NPWT group and 625 in MWC group) and 8 trials were included for the qualitative and quantitative syntheses, respectively. As a result, significantly lower risk of non-closure of the wound (risk ratio [RR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.63–0.87; P = .001), lower average wound area (standard mean difference = −0.80, 95% CI: −1.54 to −0.06; P = .034), more wound area decrease (standard mean difference = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.36–1.26; P = .001), increased appearance rate of granulation tissue (RR = 1.61, 95% CI: 1.07–2.41; P-0.021), and lower risk of amputation or resection (RR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.50–0.99; P = .045), were demonstrated for the NPWT group when compared to MWC group. However, no statistically significant difference was found for the disappearance rate of wound discharge at 8 weeks, the rate of blood culture positivity, VAS-pain score, and the overall frequency of adverse events between the 2 treatment groups (P = .05).Conclusion:NPWT could accelerate process of the wound healing, and decrease the risk of post-treatment amputation or resection, without any additional frequency of adverse events, when compared with MWC, in patients with DFUs.