A randomized controlled study of autogenous platelet-rich gel and standard therapy in the treatment of diabetic refractory skin ulcer

Authors

  • Mohammed J. Alfeehan Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, College of Medicine, University of Anbar, Anbar, Iraq Author
  • Luay Asaad Mahmood Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, College of Medicine, University of Anbar, Anbar, Iraq Author
  • Salah Ismael Abdulelah of Health - Ramadi Teaching Hospital, Anbar, Iraq Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61841/qghekt91

Keywords:

autogenous platelet-rich gel, randomized controlled trial, diabetic foot, refractory skin ulcer

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of autogenous platelet-rich gel (APG) in the treatment of diabetic refractory skin ulcers. Methods from April 2017 to February 2018, 56 patients with diabetic skin ulcers hospitalized in our department were randomly divided into APG treatment (23 cases) and standard treatment group (33 cases). Both groups of patients used insulin to control blood sugar, strictly control the orbit and blood lipids, and were given anti-blood plates, improved microcirculation, anti-infection and other general treatments and standard treatment of local ulcer wounds. Patients in the APG treatment group used self-made APG and applied wound dressing according to the wound volume / area; the standard treatment group applied wound dressing directly. The course of treatment is until the wound is healed, a flap transplant is performed, or it is over 12 weeks. Results All patients except the standard treatment group were lost to follow-up. The ulcer healing rate in the APG group was 22/23 (95.7%) and the total effective rate was 100%; the ulcer healing rate in the standard treatment group was 23/33 (69.6%) and the total effective rate was 72.1% The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P values were o.002 and O.009, respectively); analysis of the healing curve and sinus closure curve during Meier ulcer in Kaplan Meier analysis P <O. 05, showing that APG treatment was significantly better than standard treatment; no side effects related to APG treatment were found during treatment. Conclusion APG is better than standard treatment for diabetic refractory skin ulcers, and it has more advantages in treating ulcers with sinus tract; APG is safe, effective and feasible for diabetic refractory skin ulcers. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1]. Singh N,Armstrong DG,Lipsky BA.Preventing foot ulcers in patients with diabetes.JAMA,2005,293:217—228.

[2]. Driver VR,Hanft J,Fylling CP,et a1. A prospective,randomized,controlled trial of autoIogous platelet rich plasma gel for the treatment of diabetic foot uIcers.Ostomy Wound Manage,2006, 52:68—70,72,74.

[3]. Saldalamacchia G,Lapice E,Cuomo V,et a1.A controlIed study of the use of autologous platelet gel fbr the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers.Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis,2004,14:395—396.

[4]. Robson MC,Payne WG,Garner WL,et a1.Integrating the results of phase IV(postmarketing)dinical trial w“h four pre“ous trials reinforces the position that Regranex (becaplemin) gel O.01%is an effective adjunct to the treatment of diabetic f∞t u1 一 cers.J Appl Res,2005,5:35—45.

[5]. Woo K。Ayello EA,sibbald RG.The edge effect:current thera— peutic options to advance the wound edge.Adv Skin Wound Care。2007,20:99 一 117;quiz 118—119

[6]. Vick VL,Holds JB,Hartstein ME,et a1. Use of autologous platelet concentrate in blepharoplasty surgery ophthal PIast Re— constr Surg,2006,22:102 一 104.

[7]. CKang CC,su CY,Huang CK,et a1.Early experi 鲫 ce and results 0f borle graft eIlriched、Ⅳith aut01090us platdet gel for recaldtrant nonun— iolls of lo、傩 r extrernity.J 1huma,2007,63:655—661.

Downloads

Published

29.02.2020

How to Cite

J. Alfeehan, M., Asaad Mahmood, L., & Ismael Abdulelah, S. (2020). A randomized controlled study of autogenous platelet-rich gel and standard therapy in the treatment of diabetic refractory skin ulcer. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(1), 5136-5140. https://doi.org/10.61841/qghekt91