scholarly journals Treatment Failures in Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis Associated with Concomitant Charcot Arthropathy - The Role of Underlying Arteriopathy

Author(s):  
Felix WA Waibel ◽  
Madlaina Schöni ◽  
Leo Kronberger ◽  
Andreas Flury ◽  
Martin C. Berli ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aroa Tardáguila-García ◽  
Yolanda García-Álvarez ◽  
Irene Sanz-Corbalán ◽  
Francisco Javier Álvaro-Afonso ◽  
Raúl Juan Molines-Barroso ◽  
...  

Objective: To analyse the predictive role of inflammatory markers in the healing time of diabetic foot osteomyelitis treated by surgery or antibiotics. Methods: An observational study of patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) and clinically suspected osteomyelitis. The patients underwent surgical or antibiotic treatment for bone infection in a specialised diabetic foot unit. Blood samples were taken from each patient to analyse biomarkers. The main outcome was the number of weeks until healing occurred. Results: A total of 116 patients took part in the study. The number of weeks until healing was similar for both groups (surgical n=96 and antiobiotic n=20, treatments). No association was observed among biomarkers as predictors of time-to-healing. Conclusion: There is not enough evidence to define the prognostic role of inflammatory markers in the healing time of DFUs complicated with diabetic foot osteomyelitis, regardless of the treatment administered.


Author(s):  
Vimal V Jhaveri ◽  
Christopher Sullivan ◽  
Ashley Ward ◽  
John Giurini ◽  
A. W. Karchmer ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND: Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis (DFO) is a common infection where treatment involves multiple services including Infectious Disease (ID), Podiatry, and Pathology. Despite its ubiquity in the hospital, consensus on much of its management is lacking. METHODS: Representatives from ID, Podiatry, and Pathology interested in quality improvement (QI) developed multidisciplinary institutional recommendations culminating in an educational intervention describing optimal diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to DFO. Knowledge acquisition was assessed by pre- and post-intervention surveys. Inpatients with forefoot DFO were retrospectively reviewed pre- and post- intervention to assess frequency of recommended diagnostic and therapeutic maneuvers, including appropriate definition of surgical bone margins, definitive histopathology reports, and unnecessary intravenous antibiotics or prolonged antibiotic courses. RESULTS: A post-intervention survey revealed significant improvements in knowledge of antibiotic treatment duration and the role of oral antibiotics in managing DFO. There were 104 consecutive patients in the pre-intervention cohort (4/1/2018-4/1/2019) and 32 patients in the post-intervention cohort (11/5/2019-03/01/2020), the latter truncated by changes in hospital practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Non-categorizable or equivocal pathology reports decreased from pre-intervention to post-intervention (27.0% vs 3.3%, respectively, P=0.006). We observed non-significant improvement in correct bone margin definition (74.0% vs 87.5%, p=0.11), unnecessary PICC line placement (18.3% vs 9.4%, p=0.23), and unnecessary prolonged antibiotics (21.9% vs 5.0%, p=0.10). Additionally, by working as an interdisciplinary group, many solvable misunderstandings were identified, and processes were adjusted to improve the quality of care provided to these patients. CONCLUSIONS: This QI initiative regarding management of DFO led to improved provider knowledge and collaborative competency between these three departments, improvements in definitive pathology reports, and non-significant improvement in several other clinical endpoints. Creating collaborative competency may be an effective local strategy to improve knowledge of diabetic foot infection and may generalize to other common multidisciplinary conditions.


2013 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 628-629 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Aragón-Sánchez ◽  
J. J. Cabrera-Galván

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 396-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne Aura Victoria van Asten ◽  
Edgar Joseph Geradus Peters ◽  
Yin Xi ◽  
Lawrence Alfred Lavery

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Devangi Madani ◽  
Alok Tiwari ◽  
Miruna David ◽  
Mujahid Saeed

2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 214-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
T.P. Elamurugan ◽  
S. Jagdish ◽  
Vikram Kate ◽  
Subhash Chandra Parija

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Aragón-Sánchez ◽  
J. L. Lázaro-Martínez ◽  
J. J. Cabrera-Galván

2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (9) ◽  
pp. 775-779 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Peled ◽  
M Kraus ◽  
D Kaplan

AbstractObjectiveNecrotising otitis externa is a severe inflammatory process affecting soft tissue and bone, mostly in diabetic patients. Diabetic patients are also at risk of diabetic foot osteomyelitis, another inflammatory condition involving soft tissue and bone. This review aimed to describe the similarities and differences of these entities in an attempt to further advance the management of necrotising otitis externa.MethodA PubMed search was conducted using the key words ‘otitis externa’, ‘necrotising otitis externa’, ‘malignant otitis externa’, ‘osteomyelitis’ and ‘diabetic foot’.Results and conclusionThe similarities regarding patient population and pathophysiology between necrotising otitis externa and diabetic foot osteomyelitis raise basic questions concerning the effects of long-standing diabetes on the external ear. The concordance between local swabs and bone cultures in diabetic foot osteomyelitis is less than 50 per cent. If this holds true also to necrotising otitis externa, the role of deep tissue cultures should be strongly considered. Similar to diabetic foot osteomyelitis, magnetic resonance imaging should be considered in selected necrotising otitis externa subgroups.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document