Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Vacuum-assisted closure versus saline-moistened gauze in the healing of postoperative diabetic foot wounds [with consumer summary]
McCallon SK, Knight CA, Valiulus JP, Cunningham MW, McCulloch JM, Farinas LP
Ostomy/Wound Management 2000 Aug;46(8):28-29,31-34
clinical trial
3/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: No; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

Diabetic foot wounds present a great challenge to wound care practitioners. The objective of this pilot study was to determine whether vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) therapy would afford quicker wound resolution as compared to saline-moistened gauze in the treatment of postoperative diabetic foot wounds. Ten patients were randomized into either the experimental VAC group or control saline gauze group. Included in the study were diabetic patients 18 to 75 years of age who had a nonhealing foot ulceration. Excluded were those patients with venous disease, coagulopathy, or those who had active infections not resolved by initial surgical debridement. All foot ulcers were surgically debrided prior to initiation of VAC or gauze treatment. In the experimental group, VAC dressings were applied in accordance with manufacturer's protocol for chronic wounds and changed every 48 hours. In the control group, saline gauze dressings were applied at the time of surgical debridement and changed twice a day thereafter. Measurements and photos were obtained to document wound progress. Main outcome measures included: (1) time to satisfactory healing (calculated from date of initial debridement to date of definitive closure, and (2) change in wound surface area (calculated from initial wound tracing to final tracing). Satisfactory healing in the VAC group was achieved in 22.8 (+/- 17.4) days, compared to 42.8 (+/- 32.5) days in the control group. Surface area changes of 28.4% (+/- 24.3) average decrease in wound size in the VAC group, compared to a 9.5% (+/- 16.9) average increase in the control group during measurement period.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help