Ulcer metastasis? Anatomical locations of recurrence for patients in diabetic foot remission

Brian J Petersen, Gary M Rothenberg, Priti J Lakhani, Min Zhou, David R Linders, Jonathan D Bloom, Katherine A Wood, David G Armstrong, Brian J Petersen, Gary M Rothenberg, Priti J Lakhani, Min Zhou, David R Linders, Jonathan D Bloom, Katherine A Wood, David G Armstrong

Abstract

Background: The "cancer analogy" is powerful for communicating risk to and organizing care for patients with diabetic foot syndrome. One potentially underappreciated similarity between cancer and foot ulcers is that both can recur at anatomical locations distinct from the primary occurrence, albeit with different physiological mechanisms. Few studies have characterized the location of diabetic foot ulcer recurrence, and these have been limited by considering only the first recurrent wound following a recent-healed wound. We therefore characterized the anatomical locations at which diabetic foot ulcers are likely to recur considering multiple wounds during follow-up and the locations of all prior wounds documented in the participant's history.

Methods: We completed a secondary analysis of existing data from a 129 participant multi-center study of participants in diabetic foot remission. The primary outcome was plantar foot ulceration, and each participant was followed for 34 weeks or until withdrawing consent, allowing characterization of all wounds occurring. We stratified the anatomical locations of wounds prior to the trial by the following outcome categories during the trial: no recurrence, recurrence to the same anatomical location, recurrence to a different anatomical location on the same foot, and recurrence to the contralateral foot.

Results: A large percentage (48%) of wounds recurred to the contralateral foot, and the proportion of subsequent foot ulcer to the contralateral limb was largely unaffected by the anatomical location of foot ulcer prior to the study. Only 17% of prior diabetic foot ulcers were followed by recurrence to the same anatomical location. Rates of recurrence remained high during treatment of a wound (0.41 foot ulcer/ulcer-year). Participants had documented wounds to 2.2 distinct anatomical locations on average, and more than 60% of participants had wounds to more than one plantar location by the end of the study.

Conclusions: Given the significant morbidity, mortality, and resource utilization associated with foot ulcer recidivism, quality and evidenced-based preventive care is essential. Our results better characterize the burden of recurrence and to what anatomy recurrence is most likely. These insights may benefit providers and patients alike for the provision of high-quality preventive care thereby resulting in reduced morbidity, mortality, and cost.

Trial registration: The study providing the data for this secondary analysis was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02647346) on January 6, 2016. The study was retrospectively registered.

Keywords: Diabetic foot; Diabetic foot ulcer; Epidemiology; Prevention; Recurrence.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interestsBJP, DRL, MZ, KAW, and JDB are employees of Podimetrics Inc, a private company which designed and manufactured the study device and sponsored the study on which this research is based. GMR and PJL are consultant Medical Directors at Podimetrics, Inc. DGA is a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of Podimetrics, Inc.

© The Author(s). 2020.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
(a) the discrete distribution of number of distinct anatomical locations of foot ulcers; (b) the cumulative distribution of number of distinct anatomical locations of foot ulcers. The cumulative distribution (b) shows the percentage of participants with wounds to fewer than or equal to N anatomical locations, where N is the x-axis value
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The anatomical locations of foot ulcers occurring prior to the study and the outcomes during participation
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
The anatomical locations of foot ulcers occurring prior to the study and the outcomes during participation

References

    1. Armstrong DG, Wrobel J, Robbins JM. Guest editorial: are diabetes-related wounds and amputations worse than cancer? Int Wound J. 2007;4(4):286–287. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2007.00392.x.
    1. Brennan MB, Hess TM, Bartle B, Cooper JM, Kang J, Huang ES, et al. Diabetic foot ulcer severity predicts mortality among veterans with type 2 diabetes. J Diabetes Complicat. 2017;31(3):556–561. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2016.11.020.
    1. Beattie AM, Campbell R, Vedhara K. What ever I do its a lost cause. The emotional and behavioural experiences of individuals who are ulcer free living with the threat of developing further diabetic foot ulcers: a qualitative interview study. Health Expect. 2014;17(3):429–439. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00768.x.
    1. Nabuurs-Franssen MH, Huijberts MSP, Nieuwenhuijzen Kruseman AC, Willems J, Schaper NC. Health-related quality of life of diabetic foot ulcer patients and their caregivers. Diabetologia. 2005;48(9):1906–1910. doi: 10.1007/s00125-005-1856-6.
    1. Searle A, Gale L, Campbell R, Wetherell M, Dawe K, Drake N, et al. Reducing the burden of chronic wounds: prevention and management of the diabetic foot in the context of clinical guidelines. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2008;13(Suppl 3):82–91. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2008.008011.
    1. Armstrong DG, Boulton AJM, Bus SA. Diabetic foot ulcers and their recurrence. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(24):2367–2375. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1615439.
    1. Chan B, Cadarette S, Wodchis W, Wong J, Mittmann N, Krahn M. Cost-of-illness studies in chronic ulcers: a systematic review. J Wound Care. 2017;26(Sup4):S4–14. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2017.26.Sup4.S4.
    1. Orneholm H, Apelqvist J, Larsson J, Eneroth M. Recurrent and other new foot ulcers after healed plantar forefoot diabetic ulcer. Wound Repair Regen. 2017;25(2):309–315. doi: 10.1111/wrr.12522.
    1. Galea AM, Springett K, Bungay H, Clift S, Fava S, Cachia M. Incidence and location of diabetic foot ulcer recurrence. Diabetic Foot Journal. 2009;12(4):181–186.
    1. Peters EJG, Armstrong DG, Lavery LA. Risk factors for recurrent diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(8):2077–2079. doi: 10.2337/dc07-0445.
    1. Khalifa WA. Risk factors for diabetic foot ulcer recurrence: a prospective 2-year follow-up study in Egypt. Foot. 2018;35:11–15. doi: 10.1016/j.foot.2017.12.004.
    1. Ebskov B, Josephsen P. Incidence of reamputation and death after gangrene of the lower extremity. Prosthetics Orthot Int. 1980;4(2):77–80.
    1. Baddeley RM, Fulford JC. A trial of conservative amputations for lesions of the feet in diabetes mellitus. Br J Surg. 1965;52:38–43. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800520109.
    1. Font-Jiménez I, Llaurado-Serra M, Roig-Garcia M. De los Mozos-Perez B, Acebedo-Urdiales S. retrospective study of the evolution of the incidence of non-traumatic lower-extremity amputations (2007–2013) and risk factors of reamputation. Prim Care Diabetes. 2016;10(6):434–441. doi: 10.1016/j.pcd.2016.04.001.
    1. Shah Samir K., Bena James F., Allemang Matthew T., Kelso Rebecca, Clair Daniel G., Vargas Lina, Kashyap Vikram S. Lower Extremity Amputations. Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. 2013;47(8):608–613. doi: 10.1177/1538574413503715.
    1. Glaser JD, Bensley RP, Hurks R, Dahlberg S, Hamdan AD, Wyers MC, et al. Fate of the contralateral limb after lower extremity amputation. J Vasc Surg. 2013;58(6):1571–7.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2013.06.055.
    1. Silbert S. Amputation of the lower extremity in diabetes mellitus; a follow-up study of 294 cases. Diabetes. 1952;1(4):297–299. doi: 10.2337/diab.1.4.297.
    1. Izumi Y, Satterfield K, Lee S, Harkless LB. Risk of reamputation in diabetic patients stratified by limb and level of amputation: a 10-year observation. Diabetes Care. 2006;29(3):566–570. doi: 10.2337/diacare.29.03.06.dc05-1992.
    1. Mazet R., Jr The geriatric amputee. Artif Limbs. 1967;11(2):33–41.
    1. Li Y, Burrows NR, Gregg EW, Albright A, Geiss LS. Declining rates of hospitalization for nontraumatic lower-extremity amputation in the diabetic population aged 40 years or older: U.S., 1988-2008. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(2):273–277. doi: 10.2337/dc11-1360.
    1. Frykberg RG, Gordon IL, Reyzelman AM, Cazzell SM, Fitzgerald RH, Rothenberg GM, et al. Feasibility and efficacy of a smart mat Technology to predict development of diabetic plantar ulcers. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(7):973–980. doi: 10.2337/dc16-2294.
    1. Bus SA, van Netten JJ, Lavery LA, Monteiro-Soares M, Rasmussen A, Jubiz Y, et al. IWGDF guidance on the prevention of foot ulcers in at-risk patients with diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2016;32(Suppl 1):16–24. doi: 10.1002/dmrr.2696.
    1. Basatneh R, Najafi B, Armstrong DG. Health sensors, smart home devices, and the internet of medical things: an opportunity for dramatic improvement in Care for the Lower Extremity Complications of diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2018;12(3):577–586. doi: 10.1177/1932296818768618.
    1. Lavery LA, Higgins KR, Lanctot DR, Constantinides GP, Zamorano RG, Armstrong DG, et al. Home monitoring of foot skin temperatures to prevent ulceration. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(11):2642–2647. doi: 10.2337/diacare.27.11.2642.
    1. Lavery LA, Higgins KR, Lanctot DR, Constantinides GP, Zamorano RG, Athanasiou KA, et al. Preventing diabetic foot ulcer recurrence in high-risk patients: use of temperature monitoring as a self-assessment tool. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(1):14–20. doi: 10.2337/dc06-1600.
    1. Armstrong DG, Holtz-Neiderer K, Wendel C, Mohler MJ, Kimbriel HR, Lavery LA. Skin temperature monitoring reduces the risk for diabetic foot ulceration in high-risk patients. Am J Med. 2007;120(12):1042–1046. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2007.06.028.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonner