4.3 Article

Autologous Platelet Rich Plasma Promotes the Healing of Non-Ischemic Diabetic Foot Ulcers. A Randomized Controlled Trial

Journal

ANNALS OF VASCULAR SURGERY
Volume 82, Issue -, Pages 165-171

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.avsg.2021.10.061

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aimed to evaluate the role of autologous platelet rich plasma (PRP) in promoting non-ischemic diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) healing. The results showed that PRP treatment can accelerate wound healing, reduce infection rate, and is cost-effective.
Background: DFU (diabetic foot ulcer) represents a major global health and socioeconomic problem and a leading cause of lower limb amputation. Although many therapies have been tested, none has been proposed as a dominant wound healing treatment. We performed a prospective randomized controlled study in order to assess the role of autologous platelet rich plasma (PRP) for the promotion of non-ischemic DFU healing. Methods: After full vascular assessment, a total of 80 patients were randomized in 1:1 ratio to receive either PRP injection in the healing edge and the floor of the targeted DFU (Group A), or have usual standard care with moist dressing with or without collagenase ointment (Group B). We calculated the total surface area (TSA) for the ulcer in both groups (cm(2)) before, after treatment and every week up to 12 weeks of follow-up. Results: A total of 4 patients (10%) experienced major amputation in group B, while no major amputation was performed in patients of Group A (P < 0.001). A >= 50% reduction in TSA occurred earlier in Group A (at 2.5 weeks), compared to Group B (4.5 weeks); P < 0.001. Complete wound healing rate was 95% (n = 38) and it was achieved earlier (6th week) for patients of group A, contrary to 77.8% (n = 28) of patients (9th week) for Group B (P < 0.001). Superficial wound infection was noted in 10% (n = 4) of the cases in the PRP arm, while in group B, 45% (n = 18) of cases had a variable degree of infection ranging from superficial to deep wound infection and cellulites (P < 0.001). PRP treatment was cost-effective, with 247.50$ vs. 437.50$ for the total cost of treatment for patients of Group B. Conclusion: PRP is a cost-beneficial novel modality of treatment that can accelerate wound healing and decrease the rate of local infection in DFU, compared to other conventional treatment modalities.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available