Clinical study in management of infected diabetic foot ulcers: superoxidised solution versus povidine iodine solution
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20182749Keywords:
Diabetic foot ulcer, Superoxidised solution dressings, Topical povidine iodineAbstract
Background: Diabetic foot ulcer is a one of the major challenging problem to every surgeon in day to day practice. Superoxidised solution is an effective concept in the wound management. The present study was aimed to compare the efficacy of dressings with superoxidised solution versus povidine iodine in the management of infected diabetic ulcers.
Methods: This is a randomized controlled study conducted over a period of one year. In our study, total of 60 patients presenting with infected diabetic ulcers are included. Patients were randomly divided into two groups of 30 each, group A (Topical superoxidised solution dressing) and group B (Topical povidine iodine dressing). Wound was observed for decrease in size of the ulcer, granulation, tissue quality and discharge from the wound at the end of each week for two weeks.
Results: In the present study, 76.67% of patients in group A and B were males and the male to female ratio was 3.2:1. The mean age in group A was 55.90±14.27 years compared to 51.50±13.18 years in group B. The mean initial ulcer area in group A was 3882±1890 mm2 compared to 3992±2000 mm2 in group B. The mean post treatment final area in group A was significantly low (1607±862 mm2) compared to group B (2351±1240 mm2; p=0.009) and the comparison of mean change in ulcer area was significantly high in group A compared to group B (2215±1060 mm2 vs 1641±856 mm2; p=0.024). The mean percentage reduction in ulcer area among patients with group A was significantly high (58.90±5.21 percent vs. 40.90±8.76 percent; p=0.024). The commonest organism isolated in group A was Escherichia coli (26.67%) and in group B, it was staphylococcus. The culture was positive in 26% of the patients in group A compared to 50% in group B (p=0.063).
Conclusions: Overall, topical superoxidised solution dressing for diabetic foot ulcer accelerated the healing process resulting in faster recovery through reduction in ulcer area compared to topical povidine iodine dressing.
Metrics
References
Pendsey SP. Understanding diabetic foot. Int J Diabetes Dev Ctries. 2010;30(2):75-9.
Beuker BJ, van Deursen RW, Price P, Manning EA, van Baal JG, Harding KG. Plantar pressure in off-loading devices used in diabetic ulcer treatment. Wound Repair Regen. 2005;13(6):537-42.
Hilton JR, Williams DT, Beuker B, Miller DR, Harding KG. Wound dressings in diabetic foot disease. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;39(2):S100-3.
Edmonds M, Foster A. The use of antibiotics in the diabetic foot. Am J Surg. 2004;187(5A):25S-28S.
O'Meara SM, Cullum NA, Majid M, Sheldon TA. Systematic review of antimicrobial agents used for chronic wounds. Br J Surg. 2001;88(1):4-21.
Anand A. Comparative efficacy and tolerability of Oxum against povidine iodine topical application in the post-caesarean section wound management. Indian Medical Gazette. 2007:498-505.
Kapur V, Marwaha A. Evaluation of Effect of Superoxidised solution (Oxum) V/S Povidine Iodine. Indian J Surg. 2011;73(1):48-53.
Espinosa G, Romano P, Soriano B, Arias E, Bongiovanni CM, Gutierrez AA. Effects of pH-neutral, super-oxidized solution on human dermal fibroblasts in vitro. Int Wound J. 2007;4:241-50.
Duckworth WC, Fawcett J, Reddy S, Page JC. Insulin-degrading activity in wound fluid. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2004; 89(2):847-51.
Abhyankar S, Veena V, Karnad S, Kulkarni KP, Juneja M Nanda B et al. Efficacy and safety of oxum in treatment of chronic wounds. J Indian Med Associ. 2009;107(12):904-6.
Frykberg RG. Diabetic foot ulcers: current concepts. J Foot Ankle Surg. 1998;37:440-6.
Abergel RP, MeckerCA, Lam TS, Dwyer RM, Lesavoy MA. Uitto J. Control of connective tissue metabolism by lasers: recent developments and future prospects. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1984;11:1142-50.
Armstrong DG, Lavery LA, Harklens LB. Validation of a diabetic wound classification system. The contribution of depth, infection and ischemia to risk of amputation. Diabetic Care. 1998;21:855-9.
Sekiya S, Ohmori K, Harii K. Treatment of infectious skin defects or ulcers with electrolyzed strong acid aqueous solution. Artif Organs. 1997;21:32-8.
Gutiérrez AA. The science behind stable, super-oxidized water. Exploring the various applications of super-oxidized solutions. Wounds. 2006;18(1 Suppl):7-10.
Gutierrez AAC, Landa-Solis D, Gonza´lez-Espinosa B, Guzma´n-Soriano M, Snyder G, Reyes-Tera´n, K. Microcyn: A novel super-oxidized water with neutral pH and disinfectant activity. J Hospital Infect. 2005:1-9.
Wolvos TA. Advanced wound care with stable, super-oxidized water. A look at how combination therapy can optimize wound healing. Wounds. 2006; 18 (1 Suppl): 11-13.
Pandey PK, Koushariya M, Shukla S, and Das S. Outcomes of superoxide solution dressings in surgical wounds: a randomized case control trial. Int J Biol Med Res. 2011;2(4):965-8.
Hadi SF, Khaliq T, Bilal N, Sikandar I, Saaiq M, Zubair M, et al. treating infected diabetic wounds with superoxidised water as anti-septic agent: a preliminary experience. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2007;17(12):740-3.
González-Espinosa D, Pérez-Romano L, Guzmán-Soriano B, Arias E, Bongiovanni CM, Gutiérrez AA. Effects of pH-neutral, superoxidised solution on human dermal fibroblasts in vitro. Int Wound J. 2007;4(3):241-50.
