Conectar
A novel autologous heterogeneous skin construct (AHSC) was previously shown to be effective versus standard of care (SOC) treatment in facilitating complete wound healing of Wagner 1 diabetic foot ulcers in an interim analysis of 50 patients previously published. We now report the final analysis of 100 patients (50 per group), which further supports the interim analysis findings. Forty-five subjects in the AHSC treatment group received only one application of the autologous heterogeneous skin construct, and five received two applications. For the primary endpoint at 12 weeks, there were significantly more diabetic wounds closed in the AHSC treatment group (35/50, 70%) than in the SOC control group (17/50, 34%) (p = 0.00032). A significant difference in percentage area reduction between groups was also demonstrated over 8 weeks (p = 0.009). Forty-nine subjects experienced 148 adverse events: 66 occurred in 21 subjects (42%) in the AHSC treatment group versus 82 in 28 SOC control group subjects (56.0%). Eight subjects were withdrawn due to serious adverse events. Autologous heterogeneous skin construct was shown to be an effective adjunctive therapy for healing Wagner 1 diabetic foot ulcers.
Wound care is a complex procedure and the related research may include many variables. Deficiencies in the sample inclusion and exclusion criteria may limit the generalizability of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for wound patients in the real world. This study aimed to evaluate deficiencies in reporting the inclusion and exclusion criteria and the characteristics of patients in RCTs of pressure injuries (PI) therapeutic interventions. We conducted a systematic methodological review in which 40 full text RCTs of PI treatment interventions published in English, from 2008 to 2020, were identified. Data on the general characteristics of the included RCTs and data about inclusion/exclusion criteria and characteristics of patients were collected. The inclusion/exclusion criteria were categorized into five domains (definition of disease, precision, safety, ethical/legal and administrative). Study duration (in weeks) was 8.0 (quartile 1: 2.0; quartile 3: 48.0); only 5.0% of the trials mentioned race, skin colour or ethnicity, and 37.5% reported the duration of the wound. Only 9 (22.5%) studies reported the drugs that the included patients were using and 10 (25.0%) RCTs reported adverse events. The presence of the five domains was observed only in 12.5% of RCTs and only 12 (30.0%) had the precision domain. Much more research is required in systematic assessments of the external validity of trials because there is substantial disparity between the information that is provided by RCTs and the information that is required by clinicians. We concluded that there are deficiencies in reporting of data related to inclusion/exclusion criteria and characteristics of patients of RCTs assessing PI therapeutic interventions.
FreshRSS 