ArticleOpen access Macedonian journal of medical sciences2019
Evaluation of the Surgical and Pharmacological Treatment of Diabetic Foot Infection: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rationales for Antibiotic Treatment Versus Direct Surgical Resection in Various Strata of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis-Literature Review and Expert Opinions.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiabetic foot infection is a major cause of patient disabilities and lowers limb amputations, with high treatment costs and hospitalisation requirements.
aimAim of this study was to evaluate surgical wound care plus antibiotic effects in the treatment of mild and moderate diabetic foot infections.
methodsThis retrospective study involved 60 patients with diabetic foot infections with or without osteomyelitis. The patients were categorised as group 1 mild and group 2 moderate. Both groups were treated using local wound debridement and the systemic administration of antibiotics. Group 1 (16) patients were treated with two regimens of oral antibiotics in two regimens, A (amoxicillin/clavulanate + metronidazole) and B (clindamycin + metronidazole), for 10-14 days. Group 2 (42) patients were treated with oral plus intravenous antibiotics in two regimens, A (ampicillin + cloxacillin + metronidazole) and B (lincomycin + metronidazole), for 6 weeks. The patients followed-up with local wound care specialists for 3 months to evaluate the treatment outcomes (cure, improvement, or failure).
resultsGroup 1 had an 80% cure rate under regimen A and a 100% cure rate under regimen B. Group 2 regimen A patients had a 61.5% cure rate and 11.53% improved, while regimen B patients had a 68.75% cure rate and 12.5% improved. Failure in both regimens was 23.8% in 20 patients with osteomyelitis, while 35% were cured and 20% improved during the study period.
conclusionLocal surgical wound care for 3 months with antibiotic regimens for 6 weeks resulted in good response and cure rates, with lower costs and fewer instances of hospitalisation. Intravenous lincomycin and oral metronidazole achieved higher cure responses for moderate diabetic foot infections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.