Aims/hypothesisOutcome data on individuals with diabetic foot ulcers are scarce, especially in those with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). We therefore examined the clinical characteristics that best predict poor outcome in a large population of diabetic foot ulcer patients and examined whether such predictors differ between patients with and without PAD.MethodsAnalyses were conducted within the EURODIALE Study, a prospective cohort study of 1,088 diabetic foot ulcer patients across 14 centres in Europe. Multiple logistic regression modelling was used to identify independent predictors of outcome (i.e. non-healing of the foot ulcer).ResultsAfter 1 year of follow-up, 23% of the patients had not healed. Independent baseline predictors of non-healing in the whole study population were older age, male sex, heart failure, the inability to stand or walk without help, end-stage renal disease, larger ulcer size, peripheral neuropathy and PAD. When analyses were performed according to PAD status, infection emerged as a specific predictor of non-healing in PAD patients only.Conclusions/interpretationPredictors of healing differ between patients with and without PAD, suggesting that diabetic foot ulcers with or without concomitant PAD should be defined as two separate disease states. The observed negative impact of infection on healing that was confined to patients with PAD needs further investigation.

Aims/hypothesis Large clinical studies describing the typical clinical presentation of diabetic foot ulcers are limited and most studies were performed in single centres with the possibility of selection of specific subgroups. The aim of this study was to investigate the characteristics of diabetic patients with a foot ulcer in 14 European hospitals in ten countries.Methods The study population included 1,229 consecutive patients presenting with a new foot ulcer between 1

Aims/hypothesis The aim of the present study was to investigate resource utilisation and associated costs in patients with diabetic foot ulcers and to analyse differences in resource utilisation between individuals with or without peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and/or infection. Methods Data on resource utilisation were collected prospectively in a European multicentre study. Data on 1,088 patients were available for the analysis of resource use, and data on 821 patients were included in the costing analysis. Costs were calculated for each patient by multiplying the country-specific direct and indirect unit costs by the number of resources used from inclusion into the study up to a defined endpoint. Country-specific costs were converted into purchasing power standards. Results Resource use and costs varied between outcome groups and between disease severity groups. The highest costs per patient were for hospitalisation, antibiotics, Diabetologia (2008) amputations and other surgery. All types of resource utilisation and costs increased with the severity of disease. The total cost per patient was more than four times higher for patients with infection and PAD at inclusion than for patients in the least severe group, who had neither. Conclusions/interpretation Important differences in resource use and costs were found between different patient groups. The costs are highest for individuals with both peripheral arterial disease and infection, and these are mainly related to substantial costs for hospitalisation. In view of the magnitude of the costs associated with inhospital stay, reducing the number and duration of hospital admissions seems an attractive option to decrease costs in diabetic foot disease.

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence‐based guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease since 1999. In conjunction with advice from internal and external reviewers and expert consultants in the field, this update is based on a systematic review of the literature centred on the following: the Population (P), Intervention (I), Comparator (C) and Outcomes (O) framework; the use of the SIGN guideline/Cochrane review system; and the 21 point scoring system advocated by IWGDF/EWMA. This has resulted in 13 recommendations. The recommendation on sharp debridement and the selection of dressings remain unchanged from the last recommendations published in 2016. The recommendation to consider negative pressure wound therapy in post‐surgical wounds and the judicious use of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in certain non‐healing ischaemic ulcers also remains unchanged. Recommendations against the use of growth factors, autologous platelet gels, bioengineered skin products, ozone, topical carbon dioxide, nitric oxide or interventions reporting improvement of ulcer healing through an alteration of the physical environment or through other systemic medical or nutritional means also remain. New recommendations include consideration of the use of sucrose‐octasulfate impregnated dressings in difficult to heal neuro‐ischaemic ulcers and consideration of the use of autologous combined leucocyte, platelet and fibrin patch in ulcers that are difficult to heal, in both cases when used in addition to best standard of care. A further new recommendation is the consideration of topical placental derived products when used in addition to best standard of care.

Treatment of many patients is not in line with current guidelines and there are large differences between countries and centres. Our data suggest that current guidelines are too general and that healthcare organizational barriers and personal beliefs result in underuse of recommended therapies. Action should be undertaken to overcome these barriers and to guarantee the delivery of optimal care for the many individuals with diabetic foot disease.

OBJECTIVEInfection commonly complicates diabetic foot ulcers and is associated with a poor outcome. In a cohort of individuals with an infected diabetic foot ulcer, we aimed to determine independent predictors of lower-extremity amputation and the predictive value for amputation of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) classification system and to develop a risk score for predicting amputation. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSWe prospectively studied 575 patients with an infected diabetic foot ulcer presenting to 1 of 14 diabetic foot clinics in 10 European countries. RESULTSAmong these patients, 159 (28%) underwent an amputation. Independent risk factors for amputation were as follows: periwound edema, foul smell, (non)purulent exudate, deep ulcer, positive probe-to-bone test, pretibial edema, fever, and elevated C-reactive protein. Increasing IWGDF severity of infection also independently predicted amputation. We developed a risk score for any amputation and for amputations excluding the lesser toes (including the variables sex, pain on palpation, periwound edema, ulcer size, ulcer depth, and peripheral arterial disease) that predicted amputation better than the IWGDF system (area under the ROC curves 0.80, 0.78, and 0.67, respectively). CONCLUSIONSFor individuals with an infected diabetic foot ulcer, we identified independent predictors of amputation, validated the prognostic value of the IWGDF classification system, and developed a new risk score for amputation that can be readily used in daily clinical practice. Our risk score may have better prognostic accuracy than the IWGDF system, the only currently available system, but our findings need to be validated in other cohorts.Infection is a frequent complication of diabetic foot ulcers, with up to 58% of ulcers being infected at initial presentation at a diabetic foot clinic, increasing to 82% in patients hospitalized for a diabetic foot ulcer (1). These diabetic foot infections (DFIs) are associated with poor clinical outcomes for the patient and high costs for both the patient and the health care system (2). Patients with a DFI have a 50-fold increased risk of hospitalization and 150-fold increased risk of lowerextremity amputation compared with patients with diabetes and no foot infection (3). Among patients with a DFI, ;5% will undergo a major amputation and 20-30% a

No abstract

Minor amputation is performed frequently in diabetic foot centres throughout Europe and is determined by depth of the ulcer, peripheral arterial disease, infection and male sex. There are important differences in amputation rate between the European centres, which can be explained in part by severity of disease at presentation. This may suggest that early referral to foot clinics can prevent minor amputations.