Our purpose was to compare healing characteristics of diabetic foot ulcers treated with dehydrated human amniotic membrane allografts (EpiFix®, MiMedx, Kennesaw, GA) versus standard of care. An IRB-approved, prospective, randomised, single-centre clinical trial was performed. Included were patients with a diabetic foot ulcer of at least 4-week duration without infection having adequate arterial perfusion. Patients were randomised to receive standard care alone or standard care with the addition of EpiFix. Wound size reduction and rates of complete healing after 4 and 6 weeks were evaluated. In the standard care group (n = 12) and the EpiFix group (n = 13) wounds reduced in size by a mean of 32·0% ± 47·3% versus 97·1% ± 7·0% (P < 0·001) after 4 weeks, whereas at 6 weeks wounds were reduced by −1·8% ± 70·3% versus 98·4% ± 5·8% (P < 0·001), standard care versus EpiFix, respectively. After 4 and 6 weeks of treatment the overall healing rate with application of EpiFix was shown to be 77% and 92%, respectively, whereas standard care healed 0% and 8% of the wounds (P < 0·001), respectively. Patients treated with EpiFix achieved superior healing rates over standard treatment alone. These results show that using EpiFix in addition to standard care is efficacious for wound healing.
Advanced therapies such as bioengineered skin substitutes (BSS) and dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane (dHACM) have been shown to promote healing of chronic diabetic ulcers. An interim analysis of data from 60 patients enrolled in a prospective, randomised, controlled, parallel group, multi-centre clinical trial showed that dHACM (EpiFix ® , MiMedx Group Inc., Marietta, GA) is superior to standard wound care (SWC) and BSS (Apligraf ® , Organogenesis, Inc., Canton, MA) in achieving complete wound closure within 4-6 weeks. Rates and time to closure at a longer time interval and factors influencing outcomes remained unassessed; therefore, the study was continued in order to achieve at least 100 patients. With the larger cohort, we compare clinical outcomes at 12 weeks in 100 patients with chronic lower extremity diabetic ulcers treated with weekly applications of Apligraf (n = 33), EpiFix (n = 32) or SWC (n = 35) with collagen-alginate dressing as controls. A Cox regression was performed to analyse the time to heal within 12 weeks, adjusting for all significant covariates. A Kaplan-Meier analysis was conducted to compare timeto-heal within 12 weeks for the three treatment groups. Clinical characteristics were well matched across study groups. The proportion of wounds achieving complete closure within the 12-week study period were 73% (24/33), 97% (31/32), and 51% (18/35) for Apligraf, EpiFix and SWC, respectively (adjusted P = 0⋅00019). Subjects treated with EpiFix had a very significant higher probability of their wounds healing [hazard ratio (HR: 5⋅66; adjusted P: 1⋅3 x 10−7 ] compared to SWC alone. No difference in probability of healing was observed for the Apligraf and SWC groups. Patients treated with Apligraf were less likely to heal than those treated with EpiFix [HR: 0⋅30; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0⋅17-0⋅54; unadjusted P: 5⋅8 x 10−5 ]. Increased wound size and presence of hypertension were significant factors that influenced healing. Mean time-to-heal within 12 weeks was 47⋅9 days (95% CI: 38⋅2-57⋅7) with Apligraf, 23⋅6 days (95% CI: 17⋅0-30⋅2) with EpiFix group and 57⋅4 days (95%CI: 48⋅2-66⋅6) with the SWC alone group (adjusted P = 3⋅2 x 10 −7 ). Median number of grafts used per healed wound were six (range 1-13) and 2⋅5 (range 1-12) for the Apligraf and EpiFix groups, respectively. Median graft cost was $8918 (range $1,486-19,323) per healed wound for the Apligraf group and $1,517 (range $434-25,710) per healed wound in the EpiFix group (P < 0⋅0001). These results provide further evidence of the clinical and resource utilisation superiority of EpiFix compared to Apligraf for the treatment of lower extremity diabetic wounds. 272
A prospective, randomised, controlled, multi-centre comparative effectiveness study of healing using dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane allograft, bioengineered skin substitute or standard of care for treatment of chronic lower extremity diabetic ulcers Zelen CM, Gould L, Serena TE, Carter MJ, Keller J, Li WW. A prospective, randomised, controlled, multi-centre comparative effectiveness study of healing using dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane allograft, bioengineered skin substitute or standard of care for treatment of chronic lower extremity diabetic ulcers. Int Wound J 2015; 12:724-732 AbstractA prospective, randomised, controlled, parallel group, multi-centre clinical trial was conducted at three sites to compare the healing effectiveness of treatment of chronic lower extremity diabetic ulcers with either weekly applications of Apligraf ® (Organogenesis, Inc., Canton, MA), EpiFix ® (MiMedx Group, Inc., Marietta, GA), or standard wound care with collagen-alginate dressing. The primary study outcome was the percent change in complete wound healing after 4 and 6 weeks of treatment. Secondary outcomes included percent change in wound area per week, velocity of wound closure and a calculation of the amount and cost of Apligraf or EpiFix used. A total of 65 subjects entered the 2-week run-in period and 60 were randomised (20 per group). The proportion of patients in the EpiFix group achieving complete wound closure within 4 and 6 weeks was 85% and 95%, significantly higher (all adjusted P-values ≤ 0⋅003) than for patients receiving Apligraf (35% and 45%), or standard care (30% and 35%). After 1 week, wounds treated with EpiFix had reduced in area by 83⋅5% compared with 53⋅1% for wounds treated with Apligraf. Median time to healing was significantly faster (all adjusted P-values ≤0⋅001) with EpiFix (13 days) compared to Apligraf (49 days) or standard care (49 days). The mean number of grafts used and the graft cost per patient were lower in the EpiFix group campared to the Apligraf group, at 2⋅15 grafts at a cost of $1669 versus 6⋅2 grafts at a cost of $9216, respectively. The results of this study demonstrate the clinical and resource utilisation superiority of EpiFix compared to Apligraf or standard of care, for the treatment of diabetic ulcers of the lower extremities. IntroductionDiabetes and its associated morbidities are a growing problem, negatively impacting populations throughout the world and imposing severe financial burdens on healthcare resources.Worldwide, 285 million people or approximately 6⋅4% of the world's population is estimated to have diabetes and these numbers are expected to increase to 7⋅7% and 439 million adults by 2030 (1). In 2012, more than 22⋅3 million people in 724
This investigation was conducted to determine if a correlation exists between wound healing outcomes and serial debridement in chronic venous leg ulcers (VLUs) and diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). We retrospectively analyzed the results from two controlled, prospective, randomized pivotal trials of topical wound treatments on 366 VLUs and 310 DFUs over 12 weeks. Weekly wound surface area changes following debridement and 12-week wound closure rates between centers and patients were evaluated. VLUs had a significantly higher median wound surface area reduction following clinical visits with surgical debridement as compared with clinical visits with no surgical debridement (34%, p=0.019). Centers where patients were debrided more frequently were associated with higher rates of wound closure in both clinical studies (p=0.007 VLU, p=0.015 DFU). Debridement frequency per patient was not statistically correlated to higher rates of wound closure; however, there was some minor evidence of a positive benefit of serial debridement in DFUs (odds ratio-2.35, p=0.069). Our results suggest that frequent debridement of DFUs and VLUs may increase wound healing rates and rates of closure, though there is not enough evidence to definitively conclude a significant effect. Future clinical research in wound care should focus on the relationship between serial surgical wound debridement and improved wound healing outcomes as demonstrated in this study.
Background:Allogeneic grafts derived from amnion/chorion are known to be efficacious in healing chronic diabetic foot ulcerations (DFUs). The goal of this study was to compare aseptically processed dehydrated human amnion and chorion allograft (dHACA) versus standard of care (SOC) in facilitating wound closure in nonhealing DFUs.Methods:Patients with DFUs treated with SOC (off-loading, appropriate debridement, and moist wound care) after a 2-week screening period were randomized to either SOC or wound-size-specific dHACA (AmnioBand, Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation, Edison, N.J.) applied weekly for up to 12 weeks plus SOC. Primary endpoint was the percentage of wounds healed at 6 weeks between groups.Results:At 6 weeks, 70% (14/20) of the dHACA-treated DFUs healed compared with 15% (3/20) treated with SOC alone. Furthermore, at 12 weeks, 85% (17/20) of the DFUs in the dHACA group healed compared with 25% (5/20) in the SOC group, with a corresponding mean time to heal of 36 and 70 days, respectively. At 12 weeks, the mean number of grafts used per healed wound for the dHACA group was 3.8 (median 3.0), and mean cost of the tissue to heal a DFU was $1400. The mean wastage at 12 weeks was 40%. One adverse event and 1 serious adverse event occurred in the dHACA group; neither was graft related. Three adverse events and 1 serious adverse event occurred in the SOC group.Conclusion:Aseptically processed dHACA heals diabetic foot wounds significantly faster than SOC at 6 and 12 weeks with minimal graft wastage.
The aim of this study is to determine if weekly application of dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane allograft reduce time to heal more effectively than biweekly application for treatment of diabetic foot ulcers.This was an institutional review board-approved, registered, prospective, randomised, comparative, non-blinded, single-centre clinical trial. Patients with non-infected ulcers of ≥ 4 weeks duration were included for the study. They were randomised to receive weekly or biweekly application of allograft in addition to a non-adherent, moist dressing with compressive wrapping. All wounds were offloaded. The primary study outcome was mean time to healing.Overall, during the 12-week study period, 92·5% (37/40) ulcers completely healed. Mean time to complete healing was 4·1 ± 2·9 versus 2·4 ± 1·8 weeks (P = 0·039) in the biweekly versus weekly groups, respectively. Complete healing occurred in 50% versus 90% by 4 weeks in the biweekly and weekly groups, respectively (P = 0·014). Number of grafts applied to healed wounds was similar at 2·4 ± 1·5 and 2·3 ± 1·8 for biweekly versus weekly groups, respectively (P = 0·841).These results validate previous studies showing that the allograft is an effective treatment for diabetic ulcers and show that wounds treated with weekly application heal more rapidly than with biweekly application. More rapid healing may decrease clinical operational costs and prevent long-term medical complications.
Amnion and chorion allografts have shown great promise in healing diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). Results from an interim analysis of 40 patients have demonstrated the accelerated healing ability of a novel aseptically processed, dehydrated human amnion and chorion allograft (dHACA). The goal of this study was to report on the full trial results of 80 patients where dHACA was compared with standard of care (SOC) in achieving wound closure in non-healing DFUs. After a 2-week screening period, during which patients with DFUs were unsuccessfully treated with SOC, patients were randomised to either SOC alone or SOC with dHACA applied weekly for up to 12 weeks. At 12 weeks, 85% (34/40) of the dHACA-treated DFUs healed, compared with 33% (13/40) treated with SOC alone. Mean time to heal within 12 weeks was significantly faster for the dHACA- treated group compared with SOC, 37 days vs 67 days in the SOC group (P = .000006). Mean number of grafts used per healed wound during the same time period was 4.0, and mean cost of the tissue to heal a DFU was $1771. The authors concluded that aseptically processed dHACA heals DFUs significantly faster than SOC at 12 weeks.
A prospective, randomised, controlled, multicentre clinical trial examining healing rates, safety and cost to closure of an acellular reticular allogenic human dermis versus standard of care in the treatment of chronic diabetic foot ulcers AbstractAcellular dermal matrices can successfully heal wounds. This study's goal was to compare clinical outcomes of a novel, open-structure human reticular acellular dermis matrix (HR-ADM) to facilitate wound closure in non-healing diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) versus DFUs treated with standard of care (SOC). Following a 2-week screening period in which DFUs were treated with offloading and moist wound care, patients were randomised to either SOC alone or HR-ADM plus SOC applied weekly for up to 12 weeks. At 6 weeks, the primary outcome time, 65% of the HR-ADM-treated DFUs healed (13/20) compared with 5% (1/20) of DFUs that received SOC alone. At 12 weeks, the proportions of DFUs healed were 80% and 20%, respectively. Mean time to heal within 12 weeks was 40 days for the HR-ADM group compared with 77 days for the SOC group. There was no incidence of increased adverse or serious adverse events between groups or any adverse events related to the graft. Mean and median graft costs to closure per healed wound in the HR-ADM group were $1475 and $963, respectively. Weekly application of HR-ADM is an effective intervention for promoting closure of non-healing DFUs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.