Effect of a multidisciplinary team approach in patients with diabetic foot ulcers on major adverse limb events (MALEs): systematic review and meta-analysis for the development of the Italian guidelines for the treatment of diabetic foot syndrome.

The treatment of patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) is extremely complex, requiring a comprehensive approach that involves a variety of different healthcare professionals. Several studies have shown that a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach is useful to achieve good clinical outcomes, reducing major and minor amputation and increasing the chance of healing. Despite this, the multidisciplinary approach is not always a recognized treatment strategy. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the effects of an MDT approach on major adverse limb events, healing, time-to-heal, all-cause mortality, and other clinical outcomes in patients with active DFUs. The present meta-analysis was performed for the purpose of developing Italian guidelines for the treatment of diabetic foot with the support of the Italian Society of Diabetology (Società Italiana di Diabetologia, SID) and the Italian Association of Clinical Diabetologists (Associazione Medici Diabetologi, AMD). The study was performed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. All randomized clinical trials and observational studies, with a duration of at least 26 weeks, which compared the MDT approach with any other organizational strategy in the management of patients with DFUs were considered. Animal studies were excluded. A search of Medline and Embase databases was performed up until the May 1st, 2023. Patients managed by an MDT were reported to have better outcomes in terms of healing, minor and major amputation, and survival in comparison with those managed using other approaches. No data were found on quality of life, returning-to-walking, and emergency admission. Authors concluded that the MDT may be effective in improving outcomes in patients with DFUs.

Offloading systems for the treatment of neuropathic foot ulcers in patients with diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for the development of the Italian guidelines for the treatment of diabetic foot syndrome.

AIM: To compare the effectiveness of commonly used offloading devices for the treatment of neuropathic foot ulcers in patients with diabetes mellitus. This meta-analysis (MA) has been performed for giving an answer to clinical questions on this topic of the Italian guideline on diabetic foot syndrome. METHODS: The present MA includes randomized controlled studies (duration > 12 weeks) comparing, in patients with diabetes mellitus and non-infected neuropathic foot ulcer: any offloading device vs either no offloading device or conventional footwear; removable versus non-removable offloading devices; surgical procedure vs other offloading approaches. The primary endpoint was ulcer healing. RESULTS: A total of 184 studies were identified, and 18 were considered eligible for the analysis. We found that: any plantar off-loading, when compared to the absence of plantar offloading device, is associated with a higher ulcer healing (MH-OR: 3.13 [1.08, 9.11], p = 0.04, I2 = 0%); total contact cast or nonremovable knee-high walker, compared to other offloading devices, had a higher ulcer healing rate (MH-OR: 2.64 [1.43, 4.89], p = 0.002, I2 = 51%); surgical offloading for active ulcers in combination with post-surgery offloading achieves higher ulcer healing rate when compared to offloading devices alone (MH-OR: 6.77 [1.64, 27.93], p = 0.008, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Any plantar offloading, compared to the absence of plantar offloading device, is associated with a higher ulcer healing rate. Total contact cast or nonremovable knee-high walker, compared to other offloading devices, is preferable. Surgical offloading for active ulcers, in combination with post-surgery offloading devices, achieves a higher ulcer healing rate when compared to other offloading devices alone. Further studies with a larger cohort of patients with diabetic neuropathic foot ulcers and extended follow-up periods are necessary.

Bypass surgery versus endovascular revascularization for occlusive infrainguinal peripheral artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for the development of the Italian Guidelines for the treatment of diabetic foot syndrome.

To report a review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bypass surgery (BS) and endovascular treatment (ET) in infrainguinal peripheral arterial disease (PAD) for several endpoints, such as major and minor amputation, major adverse limb events (MALEs), ulcer healing, time to healing, and all-cause mortality to support the development of the Italian Guidelines for the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Syndrome (DFS). A MEDLINE and EMBASE search was performed to identify RCTs, published since 1991 up to June 21, 2023, enrolling patients with lower limb ischemia due to atherosclerotic disease (Rutherford I-VI). Any surgical BS or ET was allowed, irrespective of the approach, route, or graft employed, from iliac to below-the-knee district. Primary endpoint was major amputation rate. Secondary endpoints were amputation-free survival major adverse limb events (MALEs), minor amputation rate, all-cause mortality, ulcer healing rate, time to healing, pain, transcutaneous oxygen pressure (TcPO2) or ankle-brachial index (ABI), quality of life, need for a new procedure, periprocedural serious adverse events (SAE; within 30 days from the procedure), hospital lenght of stay, and operative time. Twelve RCTs were included, one enrolled two separate cohorts of patients, and therefore, the studies included in the analyses were 13. Participants treated with ET had a similar rate of major amputations to participants treated with BS (MH-OR 0.85 [0.60, 1.20], p = 0.36); only one trial reported separately data on patients with diabetes (N = 1), showing no significant difference between ET and BS (MH-OR: 0.67 [0.09, 5.13], p = 0.70). For minor amputation, no between-group significant differences were reported: MH-OR for ET vs BS: 0.83 [0.21, 3.30], p = 0.80). No significant difference in amputation-free survival between the two treatment modalities was identified (MH-OR 0.94 [0.59, 1.49], p = 0.80); only one study reported subgroup analyses on diabetes, with a non-statistical trend toward reduction in favor of ET (MH-OR 0.62 [0.37, 1.04], p = 0.07). No significant difference between treatments was found for all-cause mortality (MH-OR for ET vs BS: 0.98 [0.80, 1.21], p = 0.88). A significantly higher rate of MALE was reported in participants treated with ET (MH-OR: 1.44 [1.05, 1.98], p = 0.03); in diabetes subgroup analysis showed no differences between-group for this outcome (MH-OR: 1.34 [0.76, 2.37], p = 0.30). Operative duration and length of hospital stay were significantly shorter for ET (WMD: - 101.53 [- 127.71, - 75.35] min, p < 0.001, and, - 4.15 [- 5.73, - 2.57] days, p < 0.001 =, respectively). ET was associated with a significantly lower risk of any SAE within 30 days in comparison with BS (MH-OR: 0.60 [0.42, 0.86], p = 0.006). ET was associated with a significantly higher risk of reintervention (MH-OR: 1.57 [1.10, 2.24], p = 0.01). No significant between-group differences were reported for ulcer healing (MH-OR: 1.19 [0.53, 2.69], p = 0.67), although time to healing was shorter (- 1.00 [0.18, 1.82] months, p = 0.02) with BS. No differences were found in terms of quality of life and pain. ABI at the end of the study was reported by 7 studies showing a significant superiority of BS in comparison with ET (WMD: 0.09[0.02; 0.15] points, p = 0.01). The results of this meta-analysis showed no clear superiority of either ET or BS for the treatment of infrainguinal PAD also in diabetic patients. Further high-quality studies are needed, focusing on clinical outcomes, including pre-planned subgroup analyses on specific categories of patients, such as those with diabetes and detailing multidisciplinary team approach and structured follow-up.

Development of the Italian clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of diabetic foot syndrome: design and methodological aspects.

AIMS: Diabetic foot syndrome (DFS) and its complications are a growing public health concern. The Italian Society of Diabetology (SID) and the Italian Association of Clinical Diabetologists (AMD), in collaboration with other scientific societies, will develop the first Italian guidelines for the treatment of DFS. METHODS: The creation of SID/AMD Guidelines is based on an extended work made by 19 panelists and 12 members of the Evidence Review Team. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology has been used to decide aims, reference population, and target health professionals. Clinical questions have been created using PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) conceptual framework. The definition of questions has been performed using a two-step web-based Delphi methodology, a structured technique aimed at obtaining by repeated rounds of questionnaires a consensus opinion from a panel of experts in areas wherein evidence is scarce or conflicting, and opinion is important. RESULTS: The mean age of panelists (26.3% women) was 53.7 ± 10.6 years. The panel proposed 34 questions. A consensus was immediately reached for all the proposed questions, 32 were approved and 2 were rejected. CONCLUSIONS: The areas covered by clinical questions included diagnosis of ischemia and infection, treatment of ischemic, neuropathic, and infected ulcers, prevention of foot ulceration, organization and education issues, and surgical management. The PICO presented in this paper are designed to provide indications for healthcare professionals in charge of diabetic foot treatment and prevention, primarily based on clinical needs of people with diabetic foot syndrome and considering the existing organization of health care.

Doege-Potter Syndrome; A Case of Solitary Fibrous Pleura Tumor Associated with Severe Hypoglycemia: A Case Report in Internal Medicine.

BACKGROUND: Doege-Potter syndrome is a rare paraneoplastic entity that is often diagnosed incidentally during the work-up of hypoglycemia of unclear etiology. It is characterized by a non-islet cell tumor hypoglycemia mostly associated with solitary fibrous tumors. These uncommon tumors have been reported in <5% of solitary fibrous tumors. Although not unique in its kind, this case is extremely important as this syndrome often conceals unrecognized tumors that can be surgically resolved. CASE PRESENTATION: We present the case of a 59-year-old non-diabetic man with a 2-month history of severe and recurrent fasting hypoglycaemia presenting with severe dyspnea and sweating. Further workup revealed low insulin, C-peptide, and IGF-1 levels and a large right in-trathoracic solitary fibrous tumor. Unfortunately, bioassays for IGF-2 were unavailable at our hos-pital. Nevertheless, as hypoglycemia completely resolved after resection of the mass, Doege-Potter syndrome was highly suspected. CONCLUSION: Doege-Potter syndrome is a complication of rare tumors. If hy-poglycemia is unexplained, this syndrome should always be suspected, and the presence of un-known masses should be investigated.

Liver injury in COVID-19 patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: an update.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has revolutionized the priorities of the medical society worldwide. Although most patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 exhibit respiratory symptoms, other organs may also be involved, including the liver, often resulting in liver injury. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common chronic liver disease in the world, and its prevalence is expected to increase together with the epidemics of type 2 diabetes and obesity. Data about liver injury during COVID-19 are numerous, while overviews of this infection in patients with NAFLD, both in terms of respiratory and liver, are emerging. In this review, we summarise the current research focusing on COVID-19 in NAFLD patients and discuss the association between liver injury in COVID-19 subjects and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

Nutritional supplementation on wound healing in diabetic foot: What is known and what is new?

Non-healing diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) are the most notable and striking complications of diabetes mellitus. More than 25% of nonhealing DFU can ultimately lead to amputation of the lower extremity within 6-18 mo after the first manifestation of the wound. Although wound healing is complex, nutritional status is crucial in soft tissue repair. Malnutrition is highly prevalent and overlooked in patients with diabetes and chronic wounds. Moreover, to date, we do not have clear recommendations or evidence about the use of nutritional supplements for improving wound healing in patients with DFU. In this article the authors briefly analyzed the current evidence on the use of nutritional supplements of proteins or amino acids, fatty acids, probiotics, vitamins, and trace elements in the wound healing process in patients with DFU.

Diabetic foot disease during the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons learned for our future.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a strong impact on the treatment of all diseases, especially chronic ones, and diabetic foot is no exception. The COVID-19 pandemic has favored the adoption of a new model of assistance delivery to facilitate the delivery of remote assistance to patients. The standard model based on face-to-face visits has been integrated by a hybrid model of telemedicine, home care and face-to-face visits to keep patients at home to minimize the number of in-person visits to clinics and admissions except for complicated DFUs. However, telemedicine is not always possible or suitable for various reasons (patients not digital, need for practical treatment of the foot etc.). In this review, we looked at the different approaches to diabetic foot ulcer management and the indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on diabetes-related lower extremity complications and the lessons we have learned for the future.

Photodynamic Topical Antimicrobial Therapy for Infected Diabetic Foot Ulcers in Patients With Diabetes: A Case Series.

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are common, complex, costly complications, associated with frequent recurrences and increased morbidity and mortality. DFUs can be prevented and their healing can be mostly influenced by appropriately and aggressively managing any infection, but the role of antiseptic therapies in reducing healing time lacks sufficient evidence. Several therapeutic interventions have been developed based on the principles of photomedicine to overcome the issue of poor drug circulation in infected areas, with the aim of killing microbial agents while leaving the surrounding host cells unharmed. Such techniques use absorption of photons by specific chromophores. Among these, RLP068 is a tetracationic Zn(II) phthalocyanine derivative activated by exposure to red light, used as a topical treatment for superficial bacterial and fungal infections. The photoactivation of RLP068 results in the production of singlet oxygen and other reactive oxygen species, able to affect a range of cellular targets, including cell membrane and/or wall, cytoplasm, and cellular components, resulting in a rapid, broad range, bactericidal and fungicidal effect. The phase IIa study showed that photoactivated RPL068 is capable of inducing a dose-dependent reduction in total and pathogen microbial load in infected diabetic foot ulcers. In this article, a case series of 22 DFU treated with photoactivated RLP068 at 5 different centers in Italy is presented. Considering microbial agents reduction, ulcer healing facilitation, healing rate (9 DFUs out of 22), and amputation rate (only 1 case over 22), the decrease in the cost of DFU seems to be a point in favor of RLP068 and its cost-effectiveness.

Update on prevention of diabetic foot ulcer.

The diabetic foot ulcer is the most important reason for non-traumatic limb amputation. Based on recent data, it has been estimated that up to 34% of type 2 diabetes patients may develop diabetic foot ulcers once in their lifetime. Risk factors for developing foot ulcers are distal sensorimotor peripheral neuropathy, peripheral arterial disease, previous ulcers, and/or amputations. Understanding the factors that place patients with diabetes mellitus at high ulceration risk and the early treatment of risk factors, and continuous education of the patient (and/or caregivers) are essential for the prevention and management of diabetic foot complications. Implementing strategies to prevent these complications is a key aspect of diabetes care, but the most effective strategy in prevention has to be investigated. More evidence from well-designed studies is needed on this topic.

Real-World Evaluation of Glycemic Outcomes and Extra-Glycemic Parameters in Diabetic Patients Treated with the Combined Formulation Degludec-Liraglutide (Ideglira).

INTRODUCTION: Combination therapy with both basal insulin (BI) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) is an effective treatment in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The recent development and release of a fixed-ratio combination of slow-release insulin degludec and the GLP-1RA liraglutide (IDegLira) represents an improvement to this therapy. We have conducted a real-world evidence study in Italian patients with T2DM to evaluate whether the encouraging clinical trial results obtained with IDegLira, which became available in Italy in January 2018, can be confirmed in Italian clinical practice. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational study in patients with T2DM treated with IDegLira from January to December 2018. Prior to the initiation of IDegLira therapy, patients were treated with BI with or without one or more concomitant oral antidiabetic drugs (BOT group) or according to the basal bolus protocol (BI and rapid-acting insulin treatment; BB group). RESULTS: A total of 244 patients were included in the present study, of whom 186 were in the BOT group and 58 in the BB group. Following the switch to IDegLira therapy, glycemic control improved in both groups, with significant reductions in glycated hemoglobin after 6 and 12 months of treatment in the BOT group and after 6 months of treatment in the BB group. No gain in body weight and body mass index and reductions in fasting plasma glucose and number of concomitant diabetic medications (in BOT patients) were observed. All results obtained during the study were achieved at a moderate dose of IDegLira. CONCLUSION: The findings from this study show that in a real-world setting, the switch to IDegLira treatment is a valid option for patients who are failing to achieve glycemic control targets and/or struggling with the side effects, such as weight gain and hypoglycemia, of other insulin therapies.

Alcohol and HCV chronic infection are risk cofactors of type 2 diabetes mellitus for hepatocellular carcinoma in Italy.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) has been associated with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) development. To study this relationship, we enrolled 465 HCC patients compared with 618 Cirrhotic cases and 490 Controls. The prevalence of DM2 is significantly higher in HCC patients with an Odds Ratio of 3.12 versus Controls. In HCC cases with alcohol abuse, the frequency of DM2 is the highest. In our HCC patients, when HCV infection is associated with alcohol abuse, the liver cancer develops earlier. In addition, multivariate analysis shows that alcohol consumption is an independent risk factor for HCC more relevant than HCV infection.

Antidiabetic therapy and increased risk of hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic liver disease.

AIM: To explore the association between hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and type 2 diabetes mellitus, describe the temporal relations between the onset of diabetes and the development of HCC and evaluate the possible effects of antidiabetic therapy on HCC risk. METHODS: We recruited 465 HCC patients, 618 with cirrhosis and 490 control subjects. We evaluated the odds ratio (OR) for HCC by univariate and multivariate analysis. Moreover, OR for HCC in diabetic subjects treated with insulin or sulphanylureas and with metformin were calculated. RESULTS: The prevalence of diabetes mellitus was 31.2% in HCC, 23.3% in cirrhotic patients and 12.7% in the Control group. By univariate and multivariate analysis, the OR for HCC in diabetic patients were respectively 3.12 (CI 2.2-4.4, P < 0.001) and 2.2 (CI 1.2-4.4, P = 0.01). In 84.9% of cases, type 2 diabetes mellitus was present before the diagnosis of HCC. Moreover, we report an OR for HCC of 2.99 (CI 1.34-6.65, P = 0.007) in diabetic patients treated with insulin or sulphanylureas, and an OR of 0.33 (CI 0.1-0.7, P = 0.006) in diabetic patients treated with metformin. CONCLUSION: Our study confirms that type 2 diabetes mellitus is an independent risk factor for HCC and pre-exists in the majority of HCC patients. Moreover, in male patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, our data shows a direct association of HCC with insulin and sulphanylureas treatment and an inverse relationship with metformin therapy.