Malnutrition in type 2 diabetic patients does not affect healing of foot ulcers.

AIM: Protein-energy malnutrition is known to be involved in wound healing. While wound healing in patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) is a complex and multifactorial process, the role of malnutrition in this case has rarely been explored. The objective of this study was to determine whether the nutritional status of diabetic patients influences the healing of DFU. METHODS: 48 patients were included in this prospective, single-center study. All patients with comorbidities or factors involving malnutrition or influencing biological measurements were excluded. Patients were followed up for 24 weeks. RESULTS: The malnutrition rate was 29.2% at baseline and 25.6% at the end of the study. The difference was not significant. Of the 35 patients with wound healing, 29% were undernourished at inclusion and 17% at the end of the study. Of the 12 patients without wound healing, 50% were undernourished at inclusion, and 42% at the end of the study. These differences were not significant. Rate and speed of wound healing were not associated with malnutrition at inclusion. 15% of patients without malnutrition at baseline had final malnutrition. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that wound healing was not affected by the initial presence of malnutrition. In our study, there is no evidence to support nutritional intervention to improve wound healing in diabetic patients. Nevertheless, malnutrition is responsible for an increase in morbidity and mortality and it is essential to identify malnutrition systematically for all patients with DFU, initially and during follow-up to treat it quickly and efficiently.

European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL), European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) and European Association for the Study of Obesity (EASO) clinical practice recommendations for the management of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: evaluation of their application in people with Type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To evaluate the application of the recently proposed recommendations by the European Association for the Study of the Liver, European Association for the Study of Diabetes and European Association for the Study of Obesity for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in people with Type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A total of 179 people with Type 2 diabetes were included in this study. Liver fat content (assessed using proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy), fatty liver index score, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease fibrosis score, and SteatoTest and FibroTest scores were determined. RESULTS: According to proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy, 68.7% of participants had steatosis (liver fat content >5.5%). The application of the guidelines using several combinations (fatty liver index + non-alcoholic fatty liver disease fibrosis scores, Steatotest + FibroTest scores, proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy + non-alcoholic fatty liver disease fibrosis score, proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy + FibroTest) resulted in a referral to a liver clinic for 33.5-84.9% people with Type 2 diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: The application of these new algorithms for the diagnosis, and follow-up of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease would lead to an excessive number of people with Type 2 diabetes being referred to a liver clinic. We suggest that new clinical and/or biological biomarkers of steatosis and fibrosis be specifically validated in people with Type 2 diabetes.