The Effect of Limb Salvage Efforts in Different Age Groups: Relationships Between Major and Minor Amputations.

"Limb salvage" efforts, such as performing minor amputations before infections spread proximally from the foot to decrease major lower extremity amputation, are an important part of healthcare today. It is unclear whether these efforts are preventing the number of major amputations and improving patients' quality of life and the cost-effectiveness of the U.S. healthcare system. Rates of non-traumatic lower extremity amputation (NLEA) among patients with diabetes decreased in the early 2000s but rebounded in the 2010s. We analyzed the proportion of major amputations and differences in amputation rates between age groups in Texas. Patient data was extracted from the Texas Hospital Discharge Data Public Use Data File. Population estimates were obtained from the Texas Population Estimates Program from 2011 to 2015 and from intercensal estimates provided by the U.S. Census Bureau from 2006 to 2010. Raw numbers of minor, major, and all NLEA surgeries and the ratio of major amputations to total amputations per year were reported for each age group. Poisson regression and Joinpoint analyses were performed to capture these changes in trends. Rates of amputations increased, with significant decreasing relative prevalence of major amputations. Patients aged 45 to 64 with diabetes are likely driving these increases. Rates of lower extremity amputation in patients with diabetes increased from 2009 to 2015. This holds for all and minor amputations. In contrast, the ratio of major to all amputations decreased from 2010. Utilization of major and minor amputation differs between age groups, remaining stable in the youngest subjects, with minor amputation rates increasing in those aged 45 to 64.

A Model Study to Evaluate Osseointegration and Fracture Healing Following Open Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF) in Diabetic Lewis Rats.

There is a higher risk of implant osseointegration failure after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in patients with diabetes due to increased inflammatory conditions, associated metallic corrosion and infection. While it is possible to avoid elective osseous surgery in patients with diabetes, it may not be the case in nonelective cases, such as ORIF ankle fractures. A total of 30 male Lewis rats (12-15 weeks old) were distributed into diabetic (D) and nondiabetic (ND) groups. Fracture healing and osseointegration were evaluated at 2-, 10-, and 21-day time points. Microtomographic and histological analysis depicted distinct differences in fracture healing and osseointegration between D and ND animals. Immunohistochemical analysis exhibited elevated proliferation (PCNA) and osteogenic (Runx2) cells for ND animals, while HMGB1 (inflammatory marker) was elevated for D animals during healing. Bone resorption marker CTX-1 was elevated in the plasma of D animals at 2 days, while bone formation marker P1NP was higher for ND animals at 10 days. Overall, this model resulted in delayed implant osseointegration and fracture healing in diabetic animals, highlighting the importance of developing new biomaterials or implant coatings that can improve bone healing outcomes in this patient population.

The Impact of Hospitalization for Diabetic Foot Infection on Health-Related Quality of Life: Utilizing PROMIS.

Diabetic foot infections (DFI) are an increasingly common cause of hospitalizations. Once hospitalized with DFI, many patients require some level of amputation, often undergoing multiple operations. With increasing importance on patient-centered metrics, self-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL) tools have been developed. This prospective cohort study aimed assessed the impact of DFI on HRQOL. Two hundred twenty-four patients completed the 29-item Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) and 12-Item Short Form (SF-12) survey. Secondary outcomes using the Foot and Ankle Ability Measures survey were obtained and included in the analysis. The study group was comprised of hospitalized patients with DFIs (n = 120), and the control group was comprised of patients with diabetes who were evaluated for routine outpatient foot care (n = 104); diabetic foot screening, wound care, onychomycosis, and/or callosities. Using this cohort, a propensity score-matched sample of hospitalized patients with DFI (n = 35) and control group patients (n = 35) was created for comparative analysis. The 2-independent sample t test was used to test for group differences on each of the PROMIS subscale outcomes. Using PROMIS, we found that hospitalized patients with DFI reported significantly worse HRQOL in 6 of 7 subscales (physical function, anxiety, depression, fatigue, social role, pain intensity; p value range: .0001-.02) compared to outpatients with diabetes evaluated for routine foot care. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups on sleep disturbance (p = .22). Patients hospitalized for DFI report lower HRQOL compared to patients with diabetes receiving routine outpatient foot care.

Pathophysiology and Molecular Imaging of Diabetic Foot Infections.

Diabetic foot infection is the leading cause of non-traumatic lower limb amputations worldwide. In addition, diabetes mellitus and sequela of the disease are increasing in prevalence. In 2017, 9.4% of Americans were diagnosed with diabetes mellitus (DM). The growing pervasiveness and financial implications of diabetic foot infection (DFI) indicate an acute need for improved clinical assessment and treatment. Complex pathophysiology and suboptimal specificity of current non-invasive imaging modalities have made diagnosis and treatment response challenging. Current anatomical and molecular clinical imaging strategies have mainly targeted the host's immune responses rather than the unique metabolism of the invading microorganism. Advances in imaging have the potential to reduce the impact of these problems and improve the assessment of DFI, particularly in distinguishing infection of soft tissue alone from osteomyelitis (OM). This review presents a summary of the known pathophysiology of DFI, the molecular basis of current and emerging diagnostic imaging techniques, and the mechanistic links of these imaging techniques to the pathophysiology of diabetic foot infections.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis: Imaging Accuracy in Biopsy-Proven Disease.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the recommended diagnostic imaging technique for diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). The gold standard to diagnose osteomyelitis is bone biopsy with a positive culture and/or histopathology finding consistent with osteomyelitis. The purpose of this study is to assess the accuracy of MRI readings in biopsy-proven diabetic foot osteomyelitis with a second read done by a blinded, expert musculoskeletal radiologist. A retrospective chart review of 166 patients who received a bone biopsy to confirm the diagnosis of a suspected DFO at a large county hospital between 2010 and 2014. A second, blinded musculoskeletal radiologist reviewed the images for accuracy, once the official reading was recorded. Imaging results were correlated with the final diagnosis of osteomyelitis determined by bone biopsy. In 17 of 58 patients (29.3%), the diagnosis of DFO by MRI was not confirmed by bone biopsy. There were 12 false positives and 5 false negatives. After the second expert read, there were 5 false positives and 4 false negatives. The overall accuracy was 84% for the second read. Our study demonstrated results comparable to the previously reported meta-analysis findings. There is a clear variation on the read of MRI that could lead to an incorrect diagnosis of DFO. An integrated approach with evaluation of clinical findings, communication with radiologist about the MRI results when indicated, and bone biopsy is warranted for accurate diagnosis management of DFO.

Are the Sanders-Frykberg and Brodsky-Trepman Classifications Reliable in Diabetic Charcot Neuroarthropathy?

The purpose of this study was to assess the intra- and inter-reader reliability of the 2 Charcot neuroarthropathy classifications (Sanders-Frykberg and Brodsky-Trepman), as well as Eichenholtz staging. We hypothesized that the inter-reader reliability, with respect to these 3 classification systems, would be moderate at best. Digital radiographic images were organized in a digital slide presentation without clinical information. All 5 reviewers underwent a standard training session administered by the principal investigator, reviewing 5 cases of Charcot neuroarthropathy. Images of 55 cases of Charcot neuroarthropathy and 5 normal cases were distributed to each of the 5 physicians electronically, who independently rated all 60 cases according to the 3 classification systems. The 95% confidence interval of the intraclass correlation coefficient estimate for Sanders-Frykberg was 0.9601 to 0.9833 at week 0 and 0.9579 to 0.9814 at week 8, which can be regarded as "excellent" reliability. For Trepman-Brodsky, the 95% confidence interval of the intraclass correlation coefficient estimate was 0.8463 to 0.9327 at week 0 and 0.8129 to 0.9226 at week 8, which can be regarded as "good" to "excellent" reliability. For Eichenholtz, the 95% confidence interval of the intraclass correlation coefficient estimate was 0.6841 to 0.8640 and 0.6931 to 0.8730 at weeks 0 and 8, respectively, which can be regarded as "moderate" to "good" reliability. The classification systems of Charcot neuroarthropathy are an important tool for communication among physicians. Based on the results at our institution, the Sanders-Frykberg classification exhibited the best inter-reader performance. The Trepman-Brodsky classification exhibited good to excellent reliability as well. The intraclass correlation coefficient of the Eichenholtz classification was moderate to good.

The Infected Diabetic Foot: Re-evaluating the Infectious Diseases Society of America Diabetic Foot Infection Classification.

BACKGROUND: We provide evidence to revise the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) diabetic foot infection classification by adding a separate tier for osteomyelitis and evaluating if moderate and severe infection criteria improve the classification's ability to direct therapy and determine outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 294 patients with moderate and severe infections. Osteomyelitis was confirmed by bone culture or histopathology. Soft tissue infection (STI) was based on negative bone culture, magnetic resonance imaging, or single-photon emission computed tomography. We stratified STI and osteomyelitis using IDSA criteria for moderate and severe infections and compared outcomes and complications. RESULTS: Osteomyelitis patients had greater antibiotic duration (32.5 ± 46.8 vs 63.8 ± 55.1 days; P < .01), surgery frequency (55.5% vs 99.4%; P < .01), number of surgeries (2.1 ± 1.3 vs 3.3 ± 2.3; P < .01), amputations (26.3% vs 83.4%; P < .01), reinfection (38.0% vs 56.7%; P < .01), and length of stay (14.5 ± 14.9 vs 22.6 ± 19.0 days; P < .01). There were no differences in moderate and severe STI outcomes except for infection readmissions (46.2% vs 25.0%; P = .02), and acute kidney injury (31.2% vs 50.0%; P = .03). There were no differences in moderate and severe osteomyelitis except the number of surgeries (2.8 ± 2.1 vs 4.1 ± 2.5; P < .01) and length of stay (18.6 ± 17.5 vs 28.2 ± 17.7; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: The IDSA classification better reflects outcomes if risk categories are stratified by STI or osteomyelitis and moderate and severe infections are not categorized separately.

Randomized clinical study to compare negative pressure wound therapy with simultaneous saline irrigation and traditional negative pressure wound therapy for complex foot infections.

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of different negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) devices and NPWT with and without simultaneous irrigation in patients admitted to hospital with moderate and severe foot infections. Ninety patients were randomized in a 12-week prospective, randomized noninferiority trial to compare wound healing in patients with moderate and severe infected foot wounds treated with NPWT after surgery. Inclusion criteria included ABI > 0.5 or toe pressures >30 PVR/mmHg, >18 years of age and exclusion included active Charcot arthropathy, collagen vascular disease, HIV, and hypercoagulable state. We compared two different traditional devices, NPWT-K (KCI, VAC Ulta) and NPWT-C (Cardinal, PRO), and NPWT-I with saline irrigation (Cardinal, PRO). All patients had therapy delivered at 125 mmHg continuous pressure. In patients who received simultaneous saline irrigation (NPWT-I), the administration rate was 15 ml per hour. The primary outcome was the proportion of healed wounds in 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included surgical wound closure, number of surgeries, length of stay, and time to wound healing. Continuous data was presented as mean ± standard deviation. Analysis of variance was used to compare continuous variables and chi-square to compare dichotomous variables with an alpha of 0.05. There were no differences in outcomes among NPWT-I, NPWT-C, and NPWT-K groups in proportion of healed wounds (63.3%, 50.0%, 46.7% p = 0.39), surgical wound closure (83.3%, 80.0%, 63.3%, p = 0.15), number of surgeries (2.0 ± 0.49, 2.4 ± 0.77, 2.4 ± 0.68, p = 0.06), length of stay (16.3 ± 15.7, 14.7 ± 7.4, 15.3 ± 10.5 days, p = 0.87), time to wound healing (46.2 ± 22.8, 40.9 ± 18.8, 45.9 ± 28.3 days, p = 0.78). We did not identify any significant differences in clinical outcomes or adverse events between patients treated with different NPWT devices or NPWT with and without irrigation.

The infected diabetic foot: Can serum biomarkers predict osteomyelitis after hospital discharge for diabetic foot infections?

The aim of this study is to evaluate serum biomarkers to monitor high-risk patients for reinfection of bone. Thirty-five patients were prospectively enrolled with moderate to severe diabetic foot infections with suspicion of osteomyelitis. Bone samples were obtained for culture and histology. Clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients were compared using χ2 square test. Biomarkers (white blood cell count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, c-reactive protein, procalcitonin, interleukin-6, interleukin-8, and monocyte chemoattractant protein 1) were assessed at baseline, 3, and 6 weeks after treatment initiation and evaluated for correlation with reinfection of bone. After 6 weeks of antibiotic treatment, ESR at 73.5 mm/h (sensitivity 62.5%, specificity 100%, area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) 0.7839, 95% CI 0.54-1.00, P < .01) and IL-8 at 15.09 mg/dL (sensitivity 42.9%, specificity 92.0% AUROC 0.6286, 95% CI 0.36-0.90, P = .0496) were associated with reinfection of bone. An increase in IL-8 from week 0 to 6 >0.95 mg/dL was associated with reinfection (sensitivity 71%, specificity 72% AUROC 0.7057, 95% CI 0.49-0.92, P = .04). An ESR change from week 0-6 of -16.5% (sensitivity 71.4%, specificity 86.4% AUROC 0.7403, 95% CI 0.48-1.00, P = .02), CRP (-)74.4% (sensitivity 66.7%, specificity 91.3% AUROC 0.7174, 95% CI 0.40-1.00, P = .04), IL-6 (-)49.9% (sensitivity 71.4%, specificity 76% AUROC 0.7371, 95% CI 0.47-1.00, P = .04), and IL-8 29% (sensitivity 85.7%, specificity 56.0% AUROC of 0.7343, 95% CI 0.54-0.93, P = .048) were associated with increased risk of reinfection. Pilot data suggest that serum biomarkers (ESR, IL8 and IL6, MCP-1) may be correlated with developing osteomyelitis and could be used to monitor high-risk patients for reinfection.

Clinical Outcomes of Foot Infections in Patients Without Diabetes.

The aim of this study was to report clinical outcomes of moderate and severe foot infections in patients without diabetes. Medical records of 88 nondiabetic patients with foot infections treated at a safety net hospital were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were grouped by the presence of soft-tissue infection (STI) or osteomyelitis (OM). The diagnosis of OM was determined by positive bone culture or histopathology. STIs were defined by negative bone biopsy or negative imaging with magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography/dual-modality radiolabeled white blood cell single-photon emission computed tomography. Patient outcomes were recorded ≤1 year after admission. Eighty-eight nondiabetic patients admitted to our institution for moderate or severe foot infections were included, 45 OM and 43 STI. No differences were noted in patient characteristics except that OM patients had a higher prevalence of neuropathy (66.7% versus 39.5%, p = .02). OM patients required surgery more often (97.8% versus 67.4%, p < .01), a greater number of surgeries (2.0 ± 1.2 versus 1.4 ± 1.3, p = .02), and more amputations (75.6% versus 11.6%, p < .01) than STI patients. OM patients had a higher proportion of wounds that healed (82.2% versus 62.8%, p = .04). There were no significant differences in reinfection (35.6% versus 25.6%, p = .36), foot-related readmission to hospital (35.6% versus 23.3%, p = .25), or total duration of antibiotics (13.9 ± 10.2 versus 13.5 ± 12.9, p = .87) between OM and STI patients. In conclusion, OM patients required more surgeries and amputations than patients with STIs; however, they had similar rates of reinfection and readmission within a year after the index hospitalization.

Increased Risk of Nonunion and Charcot Arthropathy After Ankle Fracture in People With Diabetes.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the frequency of complications after an ankle fracture in patients with and without diabetes and to evaluate risk factors for nonunion. We conducted a retrospective study of 439 patients with ankle fractures (31.7% had diabetes) and followed them for 1 year or until the fracture healed. The fracture severity and determination of nonunion and Charcot arthropathy were determined from independent evaluation of radiographs by 2 members of the research team. Nonunion was defined as a fracture that did not heal within 6 months of the fracture. The majority of patients were women (67% in each group). The risk of complications was significantly higher in patients with diabetes compared with those without diabetes. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for nonunion was 6.5 (3.4 to 12.8); for Charcot arthropathy, 7.6 (2.3 to 21.0); for wounds, 1.8 (1.1 to 2.9); for infection, 2.8 (1.4 to 5.7); and for amputation, 6.6 (0.98 to 80.0). In the logistical regression analysis, 6 factors were associated with fracture nonunion: dialysis (7.7; 1.7 to 35.2), diabetes (3.3; 1.5 to 7.4), fracture severity (bi- and trimalleolar fractures) (4.9; 1.4 to 18.0), beta blockers (2.5; 1.1 to 5.4), steroids (3.1; 1.2 to 7.7), and infection (3.7; 1.2 to 11.3). The results of the study demonstrate the increased risk of complications after an ankle fracture among patients with diabetes, dialysis, or open fractures and those using steroids and beta blockers. Further work is needed to identify areas for risk reduction.

What are the Optimal Cutoff Values for ESR and CRP to Diagnose Osteomyelitis in Patients with Diabetes-related Foot Infections?

BACKGROUND: Distinguishing osteomyelitis from soft-tissue infection of the foot is important because osteomyelitis is associated with more operations, amputation, and prolonged antibiotic exposure. Both erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) are routinely ordered inflammatory biomarkers for evaluating foot infection. When initial evaluation is inconclusive, advanced imaging is indicated, and high clinical or radiographic suspicion of osteomyelitis may indicate bone biopsy to identify organisms and antibiotic sensitivity. Although ESR and CRP levels are helpful for distinguishing osteomyelitis from soft-tissue infections in patients with diabetes-related foot infections, parameters regarding optimal cutoff values for those tests have not, to our knowledge, been defined. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What are the optimal cutoff values for ESR and CRP to differentiate osteomyelitis from soft-tissue infection in patients with diabetes-related foot infection? (2) Can a diagnostic algorithm be derived to guide interpretation of ESR and CRP to improve recognition of osteomyelitis in the setting of diabetic foot infection? METHODS: The medical records of 1842 patients between 18 and 89 years of age treated at our institution between January 1, 2010 and February 6, 2017 for foot infection were reviewed. For inclusion, patients must have had a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus, moderate or severe infection, ESR and CRP values within 72 hours of admission, either advanced imaging (MRI or single-positron emission computed tomography/computed tomography [SPECT/CT]) or bone biopsy during admission and must not have had comorbidities that could affect ESR and CRP, such as autoimmune disorders. As such, 1489 patients were excluded, and 353 patients were included in the study. Osteomyelitis was diagnosed by positive bone culture or histopathology. Osteomyelitis was considered to be absent if there was a negative MRI or SPECT/CT result, or negative bone culture and histology findings if imaging was inconclusive. We identified 176 patients with osteomyelitis and 177 with soft-tissue infection. A blinded investigator performed the statistics. Optimal cutoffs of ESR and CRP were determined using receiver operative characteristic (ROC) analysis. A diagnostic algorithm was determined using epidemiologic principles of screening evaluations. RESULTS: An ESR of 60 mm/h and a CRP level of 7.9 mg/dL were determined to be the optimal cutoff points for predicting osteomyelitis based on results of the ROC analysis. The ESR threshold of 60 mm/h demonstrated a sensitivity of 74% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67-80) and specificity of 56% (95% CI, 48-63) for osteomyelitis, whereas the CRP threshold of 7.9 mg/dL had a sensitivity of 49% (95% CI, 41-57) and specificity of 80% (95% CI, 74-86). If the ESR is < 30 mm/h, the likelihood of osteomyelitis is low. However, if ESR is > 60 mm/h and CRP level is > 7.9 mg/dL, the likelihood of osteomyelitis is high, and treatment of suspected osteomyelitis should be strongly considered. CONCLUSIONS: While ESR is better for ruling out osteomyelitis initially, CRP helps distinguish osteomyelitis from soft-tissue infection in patients with high ESR values. Further prospective studies addressing the prognostic value of ESR and CRP are needed, and a more comprehensive diagnostic algorithm should be developed to include other diagnostic tests such as probe-to-bone and imaging. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Are We Misdiagnosing Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis? Is the Gold Standard Gold?

To compare the incidence of osteomyelitis based on different operational definitions using the gold standard of bone biopsy, we prospectively enrolled 35 consecutive patients who met the criteria of ≥21 years of age and a moderate or severe infection based on the Infectious Diseases Society of America classification. Bone samples were obtained from all patients by percutaneous bone biopsy or intraoperative culture if the patient required surgery. Bone samples were analyzed for conventional culture, histology, and 16S ribosomal RNA genetic sequencing. We evaluated 5 definitions for osteomyelitis: 1) traditional culture, 2) histology, 3) genetic sequencing, 4) traditional culture and histology, and 5) genetic sequencing and histology. There was variability in the incidence of osteomyelitis based on the diagnostic criteria. Traditional cultures identified more cases of osteomyelitis than histology (68.6% versus 45.7%, p = .06, odds ratio [OR] 2.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98 to 6.87), but the difference was not significant. In every case that histology reported osteomyelitis, bone culture was positive using traditional culture or genetic sequencing. The 16S ribosomal RNA testing identified significantly more cases of osteomyelitis compared with histology (82.9% versus 45.7%, p = .002, OR 5.74, 95% CI 1.91 to 17.28) and compared with traditional cultures but not significantly (82.9% versus 68.6%, p = .17, OR 2.22, 95% CI 0.71 to 6.87). When both histology and traditional culture (68.6%) or histology and genetic sequencing cultures (82.9%) were used to define osteomyelitis, the incidence of osteomyelitis did not change. There is variability in the incidence of osteomyelitis based on how the gold standard of bone biopsy is defined in diabetic foot infections.

Do SIRS Criteria Predict Clinical Outcomes in Diabetic Skin and Soft Tissue Infections?

The aim of this study was to assess whether systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) is correlated with outcomes in diabetic foot infections (DFIs). We retrospectively reviewed 137 diabetic patients admitted to the hospital with Infectious Diseases Society of America moderate and severe DFIs. We used SIRS criteria to define severe infection based on the presence of at least 2 of the following: heart rate >90 bpm, temperature >38°C or <36°C, respiratory rate >20 breaths per minute, and white blood cell count >12,000/mm3 or <4,000/mm3. Patients with severe DFI were significantly younger (median 49.6 versus 53.6 years, p = .04), less often had type 2 diabetes (88.6% versus 98.9%, p = .01), and less often had a history of previous amputation (15.9% versus 40.9%, p < .01). There were no differences in patients with severe infections defined by SIRS versus moderate infections in the need for surgery (47.7% versus 59.1%, p = .27), any amputation (20.5% versus 29.0%, p = .29), leg amputations (6.8% versus 7.5%, p = .88), duration of antibiotics (median ± standard deviation 34.1 ± 46.5 versus 31.9 ± 47.2 days, p = .47), or healing within 1 year (68.2% versus 66.7%, p = 1.00). Length of hospital stay was the only outcome variable that was significantly different in severe infections (median 12.7 ± 11.9 versus 7.8 ± 5.8 days, p = .02). Foot-related readmission was more common in moderate infections (46.2% versus 25.0%, p = .02). In conclusion, SIRS criteria for severe infections in diabetic patients with skin and soft tissue infections were not associated with a difference in outcomes other than longer hospital stay.

Outcomes of Foot Infections Secondary to Puncture Injuries in Patients With and Without Diabetes.

It is difficult to compare foot infections in patients with diabetes to those without diabetes because foot infections are uncommon in people without diabetes. The aim of this study is to compare clinical outcomes in people with and without diabetes admitted to the hospital for an infected puncture wound. We evaluated 114 consecutive patients from June 2011 to March 2019 with foot infection resulting from a puncture injury; 83 had diabetes and 31 did not have diabetes. We evaluated peripheral arterial disease (PAD), sensory neuropathy, the need for surgery and amputation, length of hospitalization, and presence of osteomyelitis. Patients with diabetes were 31 times more likely to have neuropathy (91.6% versus 25.8%, p < .001, confidence interval [CI] 10.2 to 95.3), 8 times more likely to have PAD (34.9% versus 6.5%, p = .002, CI 1.7 to 35), and 7 times more likely to have kidney disease (19.3% versus 3.2%, p < .05, CI 0.9 to 56.5). They also took longer before presenting to the hospital (mean 20.1 ± 36.3 versus 18.8 ± 34.8 days, p = .09, CI 13 to 26.5); however, this result was not statistically significant. Patients with diabetes were 9 times more likely to have osteomyelitis (37.3% versus 6.5%, p = .001, CI 1.9 to 38.8). In addition, they were more likely to require surgery (95% versus 77%, p < .001, CI 1.6 to 21.4), required more surgeries (2.7 ± 1.3 versus 1.3 ± 0.8, p < .00001, CI 2.1 to 2.5), were 14 times more likely to have amputations (48.2% versus 6.5%, p < .0001, CI 3.0 to 60.2), and had 2 times longer hospital stays (16.2 ± 10.6 versus 7.5 ± 9 days, p = .0001, CI 11.9 to 15.9. Infected puncture wounds in patients with diabetes often fair much worse with more detrimental outcomes than those in patients without diabetes.

Erbium: Yttrium Aluminum Garnet Laser Accelerates Healing in Indolent Diabetic Foot Ulcers.

The objective of the study was to evaluate the effect of the erbium:yttrium aluminum garnet (YAG) laser on diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) that had not responded to standard care. We retrospectively evaluated 22 nonhealing DFUs that received at least 4 weeks of standard wound care, demonstrated poor healing response, and subsequently were treated with an erbium:YAG laser. We measured the percent wound area reduction (PWAR) for the 4 weeks before initiating laser therapy and the PWAR for 4 weeks after the initiation of laser therapy. Erbium:YAG laser treatment consisted of 2 components: debridement and resurfacing. The laser settings were the same for all treatments. We used the paired t test to compare pretreatment with posttreatment wound area reduction. During the 4-week period before the initiation of laser therapy, the average PWAR was -33.6%. Four weeks after initiating treatment with the erbium:YAG laser, the average PWAR was 63.4% (p = .002) and 72.7% of wounds had ≥50% PWAR. By 12 weeks, 50% of wounds had healed. Erbium:YAG laser therapy accelerated DFU healing in a cohort of patients with ulcers that had been unresponsive to standard of care therapy.

Diagnostic Utility of Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate and C-Reactive Protein in Osteomyelitis of the Foot in Persons Without Diabetes.

The aim of the study was to assess the diagnostic value of erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels in differentiating foot osteomyelitis (OM) from soft tissue infection (STI) in persons without diabetes. We evaluated 102 patients in a retrospective cohort study of nondiabetic patients admitted to our institution with OM (n = 51) and with STI (n = 51). Patient diagnosis was determined through bone culture and/or histopathology for OM and magnetic resonance scan and/or single-photon emission computed tomography for STI. Cutoffs for ESR and CRP to predict OM as identified by receiver operating characteristic were 45.5 mm/h and 3.45 mg/dL, respectively. The ESR cutoff demonstrated a sensitivity and specificity of 49% and 79%, while the values for CRP were 45% and 71%, respectively. The combined sensitivity and specificity for ESR and CRP were 33% and 84%. The positive and negative predictive values were 68% and 60% for ESR and 61% and 56% for CRP, respectively. In conclusion, ESR and CRP demonstrate poor sensitivity and specificity for detecting OM in the nondiabetic foot. These markers have little diagnostic utility in the nondiabetic foot.

Erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein to monitor treatment outcomes in diabetic foot osteomyelitis.

This study sought to evaluate the effectiveness of the inflammatory markers, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP), in monitoring treatment of osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot. We screened 150 charts of patients admitted to our hospital with diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO), confirmed by positive results of bone culture and/or histopathology. We included patients who had an initial ESR/CRP within 72 hours of admission and two reported follow-up values. We dichotomised patients based on the outcomes wound healing, re-infection, recurrent ulceration, re-hospitalisation, additional surgery, re-amputation and death, all within 12 months, and analysed the trajectories of the markers over time. Our primary outcome, DFO remission, was defined as wound healing within 12 months of follow-up without re-infection. We included 122 subjects; 65 patients (53·3%) had a combination of positive culture and histopathology. Factors associated with DFO remission (n = 46) were a lower white blood count (WBC) at admission (P = 0·006) and a higher glomerular filtration rate (GFR, P = 0·049). Factors associated with healing were a lower WBC (P = 0·004), a higher GFR (P = 0·01), longer wound duration before admission (P = 0·01), location of the ulcer on the great toe (P = 0·01) and higher glycated haemoglobin (P = 0·03). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated no associations between DFO remission and other variables collected. Trajectories of the inflammatory markers showed an association between stagnating values of ESR and CRP and poor clinical outcomes. In this study population, the trajectories of both ESR and CRP during 12 months follow-up suggest a predictive role of both inflammatory markers when monitoring treatment of DFO.

The value of inflammatory markers to diagnose and monitor diabetic foot osteomyelitis.

In this study, we assessed the effectiveness of inflammatory markers to diagnose and monitor the treatment of osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot. We evaluated 35 consecutive patients admitted to our hospital with infected foot ulcers. Patients were divided in two groups based on the results of bone culture and histopathology: osteomyelitis and no osteomyelitis. The erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-8), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (MCP-1) and macrophage inflammatory protein-1 alpha (MIP1α) were measured at baseline after 3 and 6 weeks of standard therapy. PCT levels in the osteomyelitis group were significantly higher at baseline than in the group with no osteomyelitis (P = 0·049). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the levels of the other markers. CRP, ESR, PCT and IL-6 levels significantly declined in the group with osteomyelitis after starting therapy, while MCP-1 increased (P = 0·002). TNFα and MIP1α levels were below range in 80 out of 97 samples and therefore not reported. Our results suggest that PCT might be useful to distinguish osteomyelitis in infected foot ulcers. CRP, ESR, PCT and IL-6 are valuable when monitoring the effect of therapy.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Probe to Bone to Detect Osteomyelitis in the Diabetic Foot: A Systematic Review.

The probe-to-bone (PTB) test is a commonly used clinical test for osteomyelitis (OM), but its utility has been questioned in clinical settings where the prevalence of OM is low. This article aims to systematically review the accuracy of the PTB test to diagnose diabetic foot OM. We searched Ovid Medline and Scopus databases for studies using the keywords "probe to bone," "osteomyelitis," and "diabetic foot" from 1946 to May 2015. We summarized characteristics of the included studies and pooled the accuracy numbers using a bivariate random-effects model. Seven studies met our inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for the PTB test was 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI], .75-.93) and 0.83 (95% CI, .65-.93), respectively. We conclude that the PTB test can accurately rule in diabetic foot OM in the high-risk patients and rule out OM in low-risk patients.