Trial reportPloS one2021
Cost-effectiveness of TLC-NOSF dressings versus neutral dressings for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers in France.
Trial report in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01717183 (Assessment of the Efficacy and Safety of a New Wound Dressing in the Local Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Assessment of the Efficacy and Safety of a New Wound Dressing in the Local Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers: a Prospective, Randomised, Controlled, Double-blind, European Multicentre Clinical Trial
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sucrose Octasulfate-Impregnated Dressings for Adults With Difficult-to-Heal Noninfected Diabetic Foot Ulcers and Difficult-to-Heal Noninfected Venous Leg Ulcers: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2024Pooled it
- Within-trial cost-effectiveness of novel macrophage-regulating treatment on wound healing in patients with diabetic foot ulcers.Journal of food and drug analysis · 2025Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of Novel Macrophage-Regulating Treatment for Wound Healing in Patients With Diabetic Foot Ulcers From the Taiwan Health Care Sector Perspective.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- An Early Trial-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Diabetes Related Foot Ulcer Healing.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of ON101 with general wound care for diabetic foot ulcers among patients with type 2 diabetes in Singapore: Analysis of a multi-ethnic country in Asia.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Article
- A low-cost, antimicrobial aloe-alginate hydrogel film containing Australian First Nations remedy 'lemon myrtle oil' (Heliyon · 2024Article
- Role of the Healico© Wound Care Smartphone Application in Preventing a Foot Amputation in a 65-Year-Old Patient with Diabetes.The American journal of case reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of Technology Lipido-Colloid with Nano Oligo Saccharide Factor (TLC-NOSF) wound dressings versus neutral dressings in the management of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) from a French collective perspective. We used a Markov microsimulation cohort model to simulate the DFU monthly progression over the lifetime horizon. Our study employed a mixed method design with model inputs including data from interventional and observational studies, French databases and expert opinion. The demographic characteristics of the simulated population and clinical efficacy were based on the EXPLORER double-blind randomized controlled trial. Health-related quality of life, costs, and resource use inputs were taken from the literature relevant to the French context. The main outcomes included life-years without DFU (LYsw/DFU), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), amputations, and lifetime costs. To assess the robustness of the results, sensitivity and subgroup analyses based on the wound duration at treatment initiation were performed. Treatment with the TLC-NOSF dressing led to total cost savings per patient of EUR 35,489, associated with gains of 0.50 LYw/DFU and 0.16 QALY. TLC-NOSF dressings were established as the dominant strategy in the base case and all sensitivity analyses. Furthermore, the model revealed that, for every 100 patients treated with TLC-NOSF dressings, two amputations could be avoided. According to the subgroup analysis results, the sooner the TLC-NOSF treatment was initiated, the better were the outcomes, with the highest benefits for ulcers with a duration of two months or less (+0.65 LYw/DFU, +0.23 QALY, and cost savings of EUR 55,710). The results from the French perspective are consistent with the ones from the German and British perspectives. TLC-NOSF dressings are cost-saving compared to neutral dressings, leading to an increase in patients' health benefits and a decrease in the associated treatment costs. These results can thus be used to guide healthcare decisionmakers. The potential savings could represent EUR 3,345 per treated patient per year and even reach EUR 4,771 when TLC-NOSF dressings are used as first line treatment. The EXPLORER trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01717183.
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.