Published: 2020-06-25

A study on clinical grading and bacteriological profile of diabetic foot ulcers in tertiary care centre

Mohammed Hamza, Thomas K. Thomas


Background: Diabetes is one of the commonest diseases worldwide and diabetic foot ulcer and its complications are associated with significant morbidity and even amputation. Early detection of colonizing agent of these ulcers help in reduced morbidity and hospital stay. We targeted this subgroup of patients to study Wagner’s grade, identify the bacterial agent and its antibiotic sensitivity and ankle-brachial pressure index (ABPI) assessment to detect PAD, for the best treatment outcome of diabetic foot ulcers.

Methods: The present study was conducted in the Department of Surgery of SGMCRF, Venjaramoodu on 210 patients with diabetic foot ulcers between November 2017 and May 2019. Wagner’s grading of ulcer, culture and antibiotic sensitivity of microbe were done as well as ABPI was measured. Outcome of ulcers was compared to ABPI and ABPI was compared to time of healing.

Results: Out of 210 patients 122 were males and 88 females, 62.9% had neuropathy and 66.7% had vasculopathy. Most patients presented with Wagner’s grade-II ulcers.  Most common microbe isolated was pseudomonas aeruginosa which was most sensitive to piperacillin and tazobactam combination. Majority of lesions 62.9% had ABPI in range of 0.5-0.89.

Conclusions: Wagner’s grading and presence of neuropathy are predictors of major amputation. Piperacillin and tazobactam should be empirical choice of antibiotic. ABPI was inversely related to time of healing and has got significant association with treatment outcome.


Diabetic foot ulcer, Ankle brachial pressure index, Peripheral arterial disease

Full Text:



Cho NH, Shaw JE, Karuranga S, Huang Y, Fernandes RJD, Ohlrogge AW, et al. IDF Diabetes Atlas: Global estimates of diabetes prevalence for 2017 and projections for 2045. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2018;138:271-81.

Mohan V, Sandeep S, Deepa R, Shah B, Varghese C. Epidemiology of type-2 diabetes: Indian scenario. Indian J Med Res. 2007;125(3):217-30.

Swarna SR, Madhavan R, Gomathi S, Thamaraiselvi S. A study of biofilm on diabetic foot ulcer. Int J Res Pharm Biomed Sci. 2012;3:1809-14.

Hudzicki J. Kirby-Bauer Disk Diffusion Susceptibility Test Protocol. 2016;2009:1-23.

Smith RG. Validation of Wagner’s classification: a literature review. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2003;49(1):54-62.

Qaisi AM, Nott DM, King DH, Kaddoura S. Ankle brachial pressure index (ABPI): An update for practitioners. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2009;5:833.

Mills JL, Beckett WC, Taylor SM. The diabetic foot: consequences of delayed treatment and referral. South Med J. 1991;84(8):970-4.

Frykberg RG, Veves A. Diabetic foot infections. Diabetes Metab Rev. 1996;12(3):255-70.

Joshi N, Caputo GM, Weitekamp MR, Karchmer AW. Infections in patients with diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(25):1906-12.

Prompers L, Schaper N, Apelqvist J, Edmonds M, Jude E, Mauricio D, et al. Prediction of outcome in individuals with diabetic foot ulcers: focus on the differences between individuals with and without peripheral arterial disease, The Eurodiale Study. Diabetologia. 2008;51(5):747-55.

Nageen A. The most prevalent organism in diabetic foot ulcers and its drug sensitivity and resistance to different standard antibiotics. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2016;26(4):293-6.

Praveena DL, Uppin SM, Shimikore SS. A one-year cross sectional study on role of Wagner’s classification in predicting the outcome in diabetic foot ulcer patients. Int Surg J. 2018;5(7):2537-42.