Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21385806›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2011

Use of weekly, low dose, high frequency ultrasound for hard to heal venous leg ulcers: the VenUS III randomised controlled trial.

Judith M Watson, Arthur R Kang'ombe, Marta O Soares, Ling-Hsiang Chuang, Gill Worthy, J Martin Bland, Cynthia Iglesias, Nicky Cullum, David Torgerson, E Andrea Nelson and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Dressings and topical agents for treating venous leg ulcers.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Venous leg ulcers.BMJ clinical evidence · 2011
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Wound Healing Devices Brief Vignettes.Advances in wound care · 2016
    Review
  15. Venous leg ulcers.BMJ clinical evidence · 2016
    Review
  16. The Benefit of Dual-frequency Ultrasound in Patients Treated by Injection Lipolysis.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2015
    Article
  17. Article
  18. New techniques for wound debridement.International wound journal · 2013
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Judith M WatsonDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, UK.
Arthur R Kang'ombe
Marta O Soares
Ling-Hsiang Chuang
Gill Worthy
J Martin Bland
Cynthia Iglesias
Nicky Cullum
David Torgerson
E Andrea Nelson
VenUS III Team
University of York · GBKleijnen Systematic Reviews (United Kingdom) · GBUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

Department of Health 02/37/03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the clinical effectiveness of weekly delivery of low dose, high frequency therapeutic ultrasound in conjunction with standard care for hard to heal venous leg ulcers.

designMulticentre, pragmatic, two arm randomised controlled trial.

settingCommunity and district nurse led services, community leg ulcer clinics, and hospital outpatient leg ulcer clinics in 12 urban and rural settings (11 in the United Kingdom and one in the Republic of Ireland).

participants337 patients with at least one venous leg ulcer of >6 months' duration or >5 cm(2) area and an ankle brachial pressure index of ≥ 0.8.

interventionsWeekly administration of low dose, high frequency ultrasound therapy (0.5 W/cm(2), 1 MHz, pulsed pattern of 1:4) for up to 12 weeks plus standard care compared with standard care alone.

main outcome measuresPrimary outcome was time to healing of the largest eligible leg ulcer. Secondary outcomes were proportion of patients healed by 12 months, percentage and absolute change in ulcer size, proportion of time participants were ulcer-free, health related quality of life, and adverse events.

resultsThe two groups showed no significant difference in the time to healing of the reference leg ulcer (log rank test, P=0.61). After adjustment for baseline ulcer area, baseline ulcer duration, use of compression bandaging, and study centre, there was still no evidence of a difference in time to healing (hazard ratio 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.70 to 1.40), P=0.97). The median time to healing of the reference leg ulcer was inestimable. There was no significant difference between groups in the proportion of participants with all ulcers healed by 12 months (72/168 in ultrasound group v 78/169 in standard care group, P=0.39 for Fisher's exact test) nor in the change in ulcer size at four weeks by treatment group (model estimate 0.05 (95% CI -0.09 to 0.19)). There was no difference in time to complete healing of all ulcers (log rank test, P=0.61), with median time to healing of 328 days (95% CI 235 to inestimable) with standard care and 365 days (224 days to inestimable) with ultrasound. There was no evidence of a difference in rates of recurrence of healed ulcers (17/31 with ultrasound v 14/31 with standard care, P=0.68 for Fisher's exact test). There was no difference between the two groups in health related quality of life, both for the physical component score (model estimate 0.69 (-1.79 to 3.08)) and the mental component score (model estimate -0.93 (-3.30 to 1.44)), but there were significantly more adverse events in the ultrasound group (model estimate 0.30 (0.01 to 0.60)). There was a significant relation between time to ulcer healing and baseline ulcer area (hazard ratio 0.64 (0.55 to 0.75)) and baseline ulcer duration (hazard ratio 0.59 (0.50 to 0.71)), with larger and older ulcers taking longer to heal. In addition, those centres with high recruitment rates had the highest healing rates.

conclusionsLow dose, high frequency ultrasound administered weekly for 12 weeks during dressing changes in addition to standard care did not increase ulcer healing rates, affect quality of life, or reduce ulcer recurrence. Trial registration ISRCTN21175670 and National Research Register N0484162339.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHigh-Intensity Focused Ultrasound AblationHumansIrelandKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedSecondary PreventionTreatment OutcomeUnited KingdomVaricose UlcerWound HealingYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID21385806
PMCPMC3050437
OpenAlexW2020855126

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.