Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35796769›Full record

Trial reportDiabetes care2022

The Use of Point-of-Care Bacterial Autofluorescence Imaging in the Management of Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

Sara Rahma, Janet Woods, Sarah Brown, Jane Nixon, David Russell

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Diabetes care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. A Scoping Review of Fluorescence Imaging: A Promising New Technology for Bacterial Detection in Burn Wounds.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. What's New in Wound Healing: Treatment Advances and Microbial Insights.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Revisiting Heinz-Lippman disease as a complication of chronic venous insufficiency.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2024
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sara RahmaDiabetes Limb Salvage Service, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, U.K.ORCID 0000-0001-6608-9042
Janet WoodsDiabetes Limb Salvage Service, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, U.K.
Sarah BrownLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, U.K.
Jane NixonLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, U.K.
David RussellDiabetes Limb Salvage Service, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, U.K.
University of Leeds · GBLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust · GB

Funding

Department of Health M23605
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo estimate comparative healing rates and decision-making associated with the use of bacterial autofluorescence imaging in the management of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND

methodsThis is a single-center (multidisciplinary outpatient clinic), prospective pilot, randomized controlled trial (RCT) in patients with an active DFU and no suspected clinical infection. Consenting patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to either treatment as usual informed by autofluorescence imaging (intervention), or treatment as usual alone (control). The primary outcome was the proportion of ulcers healed at 12 weeks by blinded assessment. Secondary outcomes included wound area reduction at 4 and 12 weeks, patient quality of life, and change in management decisions after autofluorescence imaging.

resultsBetween November 2017 and November 2019, 56 patients were randomly assigned to the control or intervention group. The proportion of ulcers healed at 12 weeks in the autofluorescence arm was 45% (n = 13 of 29) vs. 22% (n = 6 of 27) in the control arm. Wound area reduction was 40.4% (autofluorescence) vs. 38.6% (control) at 4 weeks and 91.3% (autofluorescence) vs. 72.8% (control) at 12 weeks. Wound debridement was the most common intervention in wounds with positive autofluorescence imaging. There was a stepwise trend in healing favoring those with negative autofluorescence imaging, followed by those with positive autofluorescence who had intervention, and finally those with positive autofluorescence with no intervention.

conclusionsIn the first RCT, to our knowledge, assessing the use of autofluorescence imaging in DFU management, our results suggest that a powered RCT is feasible and justified. Autofluorescence may be valuable in addition to standard care in the management of DFU.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusDiabetic FootHumansOptical ImagingPilot ProjectsPoint-of-Care SystemsTreatment OutcomeWound Healing

Identifiers

PMID35796769
OpenAlexW4284664271

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.