Conectar
To investigate risk factors for re-infection and compare the outcomes in people with diabetic foot infections. A retrospective chart review was conducted, and 294 hospitalised patients with moderate to severe diabetic foot infections (DFIs) were analysed for this study. The diagnosis and classification of the severity of infection was based on the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) infection guidelines. Skin and soft tissue infections were diagnosed based on clinical observations as per IWGDF classification in addition to ruling out any suspected osteomyelitis (OM) through negative bone culture, MRI or WBC SPECT CT. OM was confirmed by bone culture or histopathology. Clinical outcomes were based on a 12-month follow-up period. All dichotomous outcomes were compared using χ 2 with an alpha of 0.05. The result of this study shows a 48% rate of re-infection in people admitted to our hospital with moderate and severe diabetic foot infections (DFI). Patients with osteomyelitis present during the index admission were 2.1 times more likely to experience a re-infection than patients with soft tissue infection (56.7% vs. 38.0% respectively). In the univariate analysis, risk factors for re-infection included osteomyelitis, non-healing wounds, prolonged wound healing, antidepressants and leukocytosis. In the regression analysis, the only risk factor for re-infection was wounds that were not healed >90 days (HR =2.0, CI: 1.5, 2.7, p = 0.001). Re-infection is very common in patients with moderate and severe diabetic foot infections. Risk factors include osteomyelitis, non-healing wound, prolonged wound healing, antidepressants and leukocytosis.
The objective of this paper was to investigate erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and c-reactive protein (CRP) in diagnosing pedal osteomyelitis (OM) in patients with and without diabetes, and with and without severe renal impairment (SRI). This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with moderate and severe foot infections. We evaluated three groups: Subjects without diabetes (NDM), subjects with diabetes and without severe renal insufficiency (DM-NSRI), and patients with diabetes and SRI (DM-SRI). SRI was defined as eGFR <30. We evaluated area under the curve (AUC), cutoff point, sensitivity and specificity to characterize the accuracy of ESR and CRP to diagnose OM. A total of 408 patients were included in the analysis. ROC analysis in the NDM group revealed the AUC for ESR was 0.62, with a cutoff value of 46 mm/h (sensitivity, 49.0%; specificity, 76.0%). DM-NSRI subjects showed the AUC for ESR was 0.70 with the cutoff value of 61 mm/h (sensitivity, 68.9%; specificity 61.8%). In DM-SRI, the AUC for ESR was 0.67, with a cutoff value of 119 mm/h (sensitivity, 46.4%; specificity, 82.40%). In the NDM group, the AUC for CRP was 0.55, with a cutoff value of 6.4 mg/dL (sensitivity, 31.3%; specificity, 84.0%). For DM-NSRI, the AUC for CRP was 0.70, with a cutoff value of 8 mg/dL (sensitivity, 49.2%; specificity, 80.6%). In DM-SRI, the AUC for CRP was 0.62, with a cutoff value of 7 mg/dL (sensitivity, 57.1%; specificity, 67.7%). While CRP demonstrated relatively consistent utility, ESR's diagnostic cutoff points diverged significantly. These results highlight the necessity of considering patient-specific factors when interpreting ESR results in the context of OM diagnosis.
Our objective was to evaluate normative data for near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) in 110 healthy volunteers by Fitzpatrick skin type (FST) and region of the foot. We obtained measurements of the dorsum and plantar foot using a commercially available device (SnapshotNIR, Kent Imaging, Calgary Canada). On the dorsum of the foot, people with FST6 had significantly lower oxygen saturation compared to FST1-5 (p < 0.001), lower oxyhaemoglobin compared to FST2-5 (p = 0.001), but there was no difference in deoxyhaemoglobin. No differences were found on the plantar foot. When comparing dorsal and plantar foot, there was higher oxyhaemoglobin (0.40 ± 0.09 vs. 0.51 ± 0.12, p < 0.001) and deoxyhaemoglobin (0.16 ± 0.05 vs. 0.21 ± 0.05, p < 0.001) on the plantar foot, but no differences in oxygen saturation (dorsal 70.7 ± 10.8, plantar 70.0 ± 9.5, p = 0.414). In 6.4% of feet, there were black areas, for which no NIRS measurements could be generated. All areas with no data were on the dorsal foot and only found in FST 5–6. People with FST6 had significantly larger areas with no data compared to FST 5 (22.2 cm2 ± 20.4 vs. 1.9 cm2 ± 0.90, p = 0.007). These findings should be considered when using NIRS technology. Skin pigmentation should be evaluated in future NIRS studies.
FreshRSS 