ArticleCureus2023
Effectiveness of Topical Sucralfate in the Management of Diabetic Foot Ulcers: An Open-Labeled Randomized Study.
Article in Cureus, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Topical Use of Sucralfate in Cutaneous Wound Management: A Narrative Review with a Veterinary Perspective.Veterinary sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDiabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a major cause of lower limb amputations. Many treatment recommendations have been proposed. This study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of topical sucralfate when combined with mupirocin ointment, in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer in comparison to topical mupirocin alone, in terms of healing rates.
methodsThis open-labeled randomized study was conducted on 108 patients to evaluate the effectiveness of topical sucralfate and mupirocin combination, compared to topical mupirocin alone. The patients were administered the same parenteral antibiotic, and wounds were subjected to daily dressing. The healing rates (determined by the percentage reduction in wound area) in the two groups were calculated. The mean healing rates in both groups were expressed in percentage and compared using the Student's t-test.
resultsA total of 108 patients were included in the study. Male-to-female ratio was 3:1. The incidence of diabetic foot was the highest (50.9%) in the age group of 50-59 years. The mean age of the study population was 51 years. The incidence of diabetic foot ulcers was highest in the months of July-August (42%). A total of 71.2% patients had random blood sugar levels between 150-200 mg/dL, and 72.2% patients had diabetes for five to 10 years. The mean±standard deviation (SD) of the healing rates in the sucralfate and mupirocin combination group and the control group were 16.2±7.3% and 14.5±6.6%, respectively. Comparison of the means by Student's t-test failed to show a statistical difference in healing rates between the two groups (p=0.201).
conclusionWe concluded that the addition of topical sucralfate does not show any obvious benefits in terms of healing rates in diabetic foot ulcers as compared to mupirocin alone.
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.