New techniques for wound management: A systematic review of their role in the management of chronic wounds

Debridement is a crucial component of wound management. Recent technologies such as hydrosurgery (Versajet), ultrasound therapy (the MIST therapy device), or plasma-mediated bipolar radio-frequency ablation therapy (Coblation) seem to represent interesting alternatives for wound debridement. The purpose of this systematic review was to describe, evaluate, and compare these three recently developed methods for the management of chronic wounds. In January 2016, an electronic database search was conducted of MEDLINE, PubMed Central, and Embase for articles concerning these three innovative methods for the management of chronic wounds. A total of 389 references were identified by our search strategy, and 15 articles were included. We extracted data regarding the number and age of patients, indications, operating time, number of procedures, costs, wound healing time, decrease in exudation, perioperative blood loss, bacterial load, and the occurrence of complications. The 15 articles included studies that involved 563 patients who underwent hydrosurgery (7 studies), ultrasound therapy (6 studies), or Coblation (2 studies). Six randomized controlled trials were included that compared the use of a scalpel or curette to hydrosurgery (2 studies) or ultrasound therapy (6 studies). Hydrosurgery, in addition to being a very precise and selective tool, allows significantly faster debridement. Ultrasound therapy provides a significant reduction of exudation, and improves the wound healing time. No comparative study dedicated to Coblation was identified. Despite the obvious clinical interest of the topic, our review of the current literature revealed a lack of prospective randomized studies comparing these devices with each other or with standard techniques, particularly for Coblation and hydrosurgery.

Failure rates of artificial dermis products in treatment of diabetic foot ulcer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a frequent complication in diabetic patients, occurring in up to 25% of those affected. Among the treatments available to clinicians, the use of bioengineered skin substitutes is an attractive alternative. Artificial dermis functions as a matrix, covering the wound and supporting healing and reconstruction of the lost tissue. This study was aimed at reviewing the use of five regeneration matrices (namely, Integra, Nevelia, Matriderm, Pelnac, and Renoskin) as reported by clinical trials. We searched Medline, Embase, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for relevant studies. Risk of failure rates was analysed by relative risk ratio method and complete ulcer healing was studied using network meta-analysis. Thirteen studies (12 randomized clinical trials and one cohort study) were eligible for analysis. The network meta-analysis based on a single study for Matriderm and 12 studies for other products showed that Matriderm was statistically inferior in achieving complete ulcer healing, as compared to all other products combined. In the second phase analysis, which was limited to three studies using artificial dermis products, there was a 57% reduction in the risk of reepithelialization failure for DFU patients who used Matriderm or Pelnac, compared to those who used Pelnac with basic fibroblast growth factor spray or skin grafting. The data showed an overall low failure rate suggesting that these bioengineered skin products provide a suitable support and microenvironment for healing of DFUs with low ulcer recurrence rates. This systematic review with meta-analysis highlights the pressing need for more studies investigating the safety, efficacy and failure rates of regeneration matrices in the treatment of DFUs.