Comparison of a new versus standard removable offloading device in patients with neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers: a French national, multicentre, open-label randomized, controlled trial

Louis Potier, Maud François, Dured Dardari, Marilyne Feron, Narimene Belhatem, Estelle Nobecourt-Dupuy, Manuel Dolz, Lyse Bordier, Roxane Ducloux, Abdelkader Chibani, Dominique-François Eveno, Teresa Crea Avila, Ariane Sultan, Laurence Baillet-Blanco, Vincent Rigalleau, Elise Gand, Pierre-Jean Saulnier, Gilberto Velho, Ronan Roussel, Quentin Pellenc, Jean-Claude Dupré, Dominique Malgrange, Michel Marre, Kamel Mohammedi, ORTHODIAB study group, Louis Potier, Maud François, Dured Dardari, Marilyne Feron, Narimene Belhatem, Estelle Nobecourt-Dupuy, Manuel Dolz, Lyse Bordier, Roxane Ducloux, Abdelkader Chibani, Dominique-François Eveno, Teresa Crea Avila, Ariane Sultan, Laurence Baillet-Blanco, Vincent Rigalleau, Elise Gand, Pierre-Jean Saulnier, Gilberto Velho, Ronan Roussel, Quentin Pellenc, Jean-Claude Dupré, Dominique Malgrange, Michel Marre, Kamel Mohammedi, ORTHODIAB study group

Abstract

Introduction: The offloading is crucial to heal neuropathic diabetic foot ulcer (DFU). Removable offloading are the most used devices. Orthèse diabète is a new customized removable knee-high offloading device immobilizing foot and ankle joints, with some specific and innovative features that may improve offloading. We aimed to evaluate the efficiency of this device in DFU healing.

Research, design and methods: The evaluation of Offloading using a new removable ORTHOsis in DIABetic foot study is a French multicenter (13 centers) randomized controlled trial with blinded end points evaluation. Adults with neuropathic DFU were randomly assigned to either Orthèse Diabète (experimental device), or any type of conventional (usually used in France) removable offloading devices (control group). The primary outcome was the 3-month proportion of patients with fully healed DFU.

Results: Among 112 randomized patients (men 78%, age 62±10 years), the primary outcome occurred in 19 (33%) participants using conventional device vs 19 (35%) Orthèse Diabète users (p=0.79). Study groups were also comparable in terms of prespecified secondary end points including occurrence of new DFU (25% vs 27% in conventional and experimental groups), ipsilateral lower-limb amputation (4% vs 10%) or infectious complications (14% vs 13%) (p>0.05 for all). Adverse events were comparable between groups, including 4 deaths unrelated to study allocation (1 sudden death, 2 ventricular arrhythmias and 1 pancreatic cancer). Adverse events believed to be related to the device were higher in the Orthèse Diabète group than in the control group (15% vs 4%). Orthèse Diabète was less frequently worn than conventional devices (46% vs 66%, p=0.04).

Conclusions: Orthèse Diabète, a new removable offloading orthosis immobilizing foot and ankle joints did not show superiority compared with conventional removable devices in neuropathic DFU healing and cannot be recommended to heal DFU.

Trial registration number: NCT01956162.

Keywords: foot ulcer; off-loading devices; randomized clinical trials; wound healing.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: LP reports receiving personal fees from Novo Nordisk, Lilly, Sanofi and Servier and grants from Sanofi, outside the submitted work; RR is an advisory panel member for AstraZeneca, Sanofi, MSD, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, Vaiomer and Physiogenex; is a speaker for Bayer and Servier and has received research funding and provided research support to Danone Research, Diabnext, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Amgen, Sanofi and Novo Nordisk. MM reports receiving personal fees from Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Eli Lilly, Servier, Merck, Sharp and Dohme, Abbott, Novartis and AstraZeneca and grant support from Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp and Dohme and Novartis, outside the submitted work; KM reports receiving personal fees from Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Eli Lilly, Proteor and AstraZeneca, and travel support from Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim and Takeda outside the submitted work.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic illustration of ‘Orthèse Diabète’ and its different components.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Trial profile. ITT, intention-to-treat; PP, per-protocol.

References

    1. Armstrong DG, Boulton AJM, Bus SA. Diabetic foot ulcers and their recurrence. N Engl J Med 2017;376:2367–75. 10.1056/NEJMra1615439
    1. Resnick HE, Carter EA, Sosenko JM, et al. . Incidence of lower-extremity amputation in American Indians: the strong heart study. Diabetes Care 2004;27:1885–91. 10.2337/diacare.27.8.1885
    1. Boulton AJM, Vileikyte L, Ragnarson-Tennvall G, et al. . The global burden of diabetic foot disease. Lancet 2005;366:1719–24. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67698-2
    1. Moxey PW, Hofman D, Hinchliffe RJ, et al. . Epidemiological study of lower limb amputation in England between 2003 and 2008. Br J Surg 2010;97:1348–53. 10.1002/bjs.7092
    1. Fromy B, Abraham P, Bouvet C, et al. . Early decrease of skin blood flow in response to locally applied pressure in diabetic subjects. Diabetes 2002;51:1214–7. 10.2337/diabetes.51.4.1214
    1. Koïtka A, Abraham P, Bouhanick B, et al. . Impaired pressure-induced vasodilation at the foot in young adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes 2004;53:721–5. 10.2337/diabetes.53.3.721
    1. Elraiyah T, Prutsky G, Domecq JP, et al. . A systematic review and meta-analysis of off-loading methods for diabetic foot ulcers. J Vasc Surg 2016;63:59S–68. 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.10.006
    1. Bus SA, Armstrong DG, van Deursen RW, et al. . IWGDF guidance on footwear and offloading interventions to prevent and heal foot ulcers in patients with diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2016;32:25–36. 10.1002/dmrr.2697
    1. Armstrong DG, Nguyen HC, Lavery LA, et al. . Off-loading the diabetic foot wound: a randomized clinical trial. Diabetes Care 2001;24:1019–22. 10.2337/diacare.24.6.1019
    1. Nabuurs-Franssen MH, Sleegers R, Huijberts MSP, et al. . Total contact casting of the diabetic foot in daily practice: a prospective follow-up study. Diabetes Care 2005;28:243–7. 10.2337/diacare.28.2.243
    1. Wukich DK, Motko J. Safety of total contact casting in high-risk patients with neuropathic foot ulcers. Foot Ankle Int 2004;25:556–60. 10.1177/107110070402500808
    1. Wu SC, Jensen JL, Weber AK, et al. . Use of pressure offloading devices in diabetic foot ulcers: do we practice what we preach? Diabetes Care 2008;31:2118–9. 10.2337/dc08-0771
    1. Fife CE, Carter MJ, Walker D. Why is it so hard to do the right thing in wound care? Wound Repair Regen 2010;18:154–8. 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2010.00571.x
    1. Bus SA, van Netten JJ, Kottink AI, et al. . The efficacy of removable devices to offload and heal neuropathic plantar forefoot ulcers in people with diabetes: a single-blinded multicentre randomised controlled trial. Int Wound J 2018;15:65–74. 10.1111/iwj.12835
    1. Mohammedi K, Potier L, François M, et al. . The evaluation of off-loading using a new removable oRTHOsis in diabetic foot (ORTHODIAB) randomized controlled trial: study design and rational. J Foot Ankle Res 2016;9:34. 10.1186/s13047-016-0163-4
    1. Standards of medical care in Diabetes-2016: summary of revisions. Diabetes Care 2016;39:S4–5. 10.2337/dc16-S003
    1. Brownrigg JRW, Hinchliffe RJ, Apelqvist J, et al. . Effectiveness of bedside investigations to diagnose peripheral artery disease among people with diabetes mellitus: a systematic review. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2016;32:119–27. 10.1002/dmrr.2703
    1. Hansson L, Hedner T, Dahlöf B. Prospective randomized open blinded end-point (probe) study. A novel design for intervention trials. prospective randomized open blinded end-point. Blood Press 1992;1:113–9. 10.3109/08037059209077502
    1. Plassmann P. Measuring wounds. J Wound Care 1995;4:269–72. 10.12968/jowc.1995.4.6.269
    1. Demers L, Weiss-Lambrou R, Ska B. Item analysis of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (quest). Assist Technol 2000;12:96–105. 10.1080/10400435.2000.10132015
    1. Armstrong DG, Lavery LA, Wu S, et al. . Evaluation of removable and irremovable cast walkers in the healing of diabetic foot wounds: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care 2005;28:551–4. 10.2337/diacare.28.3.551
    1. Caravaggi C, Sganzaroli A, Fabbi M, et al. . Nonwindowed nonremovable fiberglass off-loading cast versus removable pneumatic cast (AircastXP diabetic Walker) in the treatment of neuropathic noninfected plantar ulcers: a randomized prospective trial. Diabetes Care 2007;30:2577–8. 10.2337/dc07-0990
    1. Faglia E, Caravaggi C, Clerici G, et al. . Effectiveness of removable Walker cast versus nonremovable fiberglass off-bearing cast in the healing of diabetic plantar foot ulcer: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care 2010;33:1419–23. 10.2337/dc09-1708
    1. Apelqvist J, Larsson J, Agardh CD. Long-Term prognosis for diabetic patients with foot ulcers. J Intern Med 1993;233:485–91. 10.1111/j.1365-2796.1993.tb01003.x
    1. Ghanassia E, Villon L, Thuan Dit Dieudonné J-F, et al. . Long-Term outcome and disability of diabetic patients hospitalized for diabetic foot ulcers: a 6.5-year follow-up study. Diabetes Care 2008;31:1288–92. 10.2337/dc07-2145
    1. Armstrong DG, Lavery LA, Kimbriel HR, et al. . Activity patterns of patients with diabetic foot ulceration: patients with active ulceration may not adhere to a standard pressure off-loading regimen. Diabetes Care 2003;26:2595–7. 10.2337/diacare.26.9.2595
    1. Knowles EA, Boulton AJ. Do people with diabetes wear their prescribed footwear? Diabet Med 1996;13:1064–8. 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9136(199612)13:12<1064::AID-DIA253>;2-#
    1. Waaijman R, Keukenkamp R, de Haart M, et al. . Adherence to wearing prescription custom-made footwear in patients with diabetes at high risk for plantar foot ulceration. Diabetes Care 2013;36:1613–8. 10.2337/dc12-1330
    1. Jeffcoate WJ, Bus SA, Game FL, et al. . Reporting standards of studies and papers on the prevention and management of foot ulcers in diabetes: required details and markers of good quality. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2016;4:781–8. 10.1016/S2213-8587(16)30012-2
    1. Price P, Gottrup F, Abel M. Ewma study recommendations: for clinical investigations in leg ulcers and wound care. J Wound Care 2014;23:S1–36. 10.12968/jowc.2014.23.Sup5c.S1
    1. Jarl G, Lundqvist L-O. Adherence to wearing therapeutic shoes among people with diabetes: a systematic review and reflections. Patient Prefer Adherence 2016;10:1521–8. 10.2147/PPA.S112275
    1. Lazzarini PA, Crews RT, van Netten JJ, et al. . Measuring plantar tissue stress in people with diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a critical concept in diabetic foot management. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2019;13:869–80. 10.1177/1932296819849092
    1. Schaper NC. Diabetic foot ulcer classification system for research purposes: a progress report on criteria for including patients in research studies. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2004;20:S90–5. 10.1002/dmrr.464

Source: PubMed

3
Tilaa