2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtv.2010.12.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

De Marco Formula effectiveness as an adjunctive therapy to prevent infected ischemic diabetic foot amputation and reduce plasma fibrinogen

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
(9 reference statements)
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is hard to draw firm conclusions from the study, because interpretation of the results was severely limited by missing details. The same group published another study of De Marco formula on patients with an ischemic diabetic foot ulcer, but it contained no infection‐related outcomes so did not add to the conclusions of the other report …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is hard to draw firm conclusions from the study, because interpretation of the results was severely limited by missing details. The same group published another study of De Marco formula on patients with an ischemic diabetic foot ulcer, but it contained no infection‐related outcomes so did not add to the conclusions of the other report …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A DFU characteristic feature is an acute-phase reaction prolongation [5]. Acute-phase reactants C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cell (WBC), neutrophil count, and platelet are commonly used as a predictor of amputation in the patients with DFU but have only modest accuracy in reflecting DFU disease severity [6, 7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is hard to draw any solid conclusions from the study because it was severely limited by missing details. Although one other study of this intramuscular preparation was published, it contained no infection‐related outcomes, and it therefore did not add to the conclusions of the other report .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%