ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2023
Comparison of customized vacuum sealing drainage and vacuum sealing drainage in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: a retrospective analysis.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Smart Composite Hydrogels for Monitoring and Managing Chronic Wounds.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Applying 3D-printed prostheses to reconstruct critical-sized bone defects of tibial diaphysis (> 10 cm) caused by osteomyelitis and aseptic non-union.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Adipose stem cell-derived exosomes in the treatment of wound healing in preclinical animal models: a meta-analysis.Burns & trauma · 2024Article
- Clinical efficacy of antibiotic-loaded bone cement and negative pressure wound therapy in multidrug-resistant organisms diabetic foot ulcers: a retrospective analysis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe prevalence of diabetic foot ulcers, a common, more serious chronic diabetes-related complication, is increasing. Vacuum sealing drainage (VSD) constitutes an effective adjunctive treatment for diabetic foot ulcers. Factors, such as poor glycemic control, ischemia, and infection prolong wound healing time, and VSD products are expensive and unaffordable for many patients.
objectiveTo compare the use of customized VSD and customized VSD in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer.
methodThis retrospective study included 83 patients with diabetic foot ulcers in customized VSD (n = 44) and VSD (n = 39) groups. Baseline data, efficacy after 14 days, total treatment efficiency, final outcome (28 days after treatment, healing rate), average treatment cost, and hospitalization (days) of the two groups were compared. Factors affecting wound healing were analyzed.
resultsNo significant intergroup differences in the baseline data were detected (VSD vs. customized VAD, p > 0.05). Treatment efficacy was higher in the customized VSD group than in the VSD group after 14 days (p < 0.05), although total treatment efficiency in both groups reached 100%. The final outcome in the customized VSD group was better (vs. VSD group, p < 0.05), and the wound healing rate was higher than in the VSD group (66.7% vs. 33.3%). The mean treatment cost and hospital days were greater in the VSD group (vs. customized VSD group; p < 0.05). Factors affecting wound healing include age, Wagner classification, HDL-C, and fasting C-peptide. Younger age, low Wagner classification grade, low HDL-C level, and high fasting C-peptide contribute to higher healing rate,
conclusionEfficacy and final outcome of customized VSD were better than that of VSD; the customized VSD device is simple and convenient to operate, and enables cost-effective treatment.
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.