Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39675776›Full record

SynthesisInternational wound journal2024

Electrical stimulation as an adjunctive therapy for diabetic ulcers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Xiaodong Lan, Zhenjia Huang, Yan Zheng, Zhiyong Huang, Yong Tang, Tao Zhou, Chao Wang, Yan Ma, Dan Li

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Electrical Stimulation Directs Formation of Perfused Vasculature in Engineered Tissues.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Xiaodong LanDepartment of Burn and Plastic Surgery, Chengdu Second People's Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Zhenjia HuangDepartment of Burn and Plastic Surgery, Chengdu Second People's Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Yan ZhengDepartment of Medical Plastic and Cosmetic, The Third People's Hospital of Chengdu (The Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Jiaotong University), College of Medicine, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, China.
Zhiyong HuangDepartment of Burn and Plastic Surgery, Chengdu Second People's Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Yong TangDepartment of Burn and Plastic Surgery, Chengdu Second People's Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Tao ZhouDepartment of Burn and Plastic Surgery, Chengdu Second People's Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Chao WangDepartment of Burn and Plastic Surgery, Chengdu Second People's Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Yan MaDepartment of Burn and Plastic Surgery, Chengdu Second People's Hospital, Chengdu, China.
Dan LiDepartment of Burn and Plastic Surgery, Chengdu Second People's Hospital, Chengdu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diabetic ulcers are chronic wounds that are notoriously difficult to treat, leading to significant physical and psychological distress and increased healthcare costs. Their multifactorial aetiology necessitates long-term interdisciplinary collaboration and various complementary treatment measures. While numerous studies suggest that electrical stimulation (ES) positively impacts diabetic ulcer healing, the robustness and consistency of these findings require further evaluation to optimize clinical application. We searched databases including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing ES treatment to placebo or conventional treatment were included. Extracted information included objective healing measures and data for assessing effect sizes. Ten RCTs involving 451 patients met inclusion criteria. ES improved ulcer healing rate compared to control or placebo (MD 20.37, 95% CI: 16.89-23.85, p <0.001) and increased the number of healed ulcers (RR 1.45, 95% CI: 1.18-1.78, p <0.001), with both results being statistically significant. The observed benefits are likely due to the positive effects of ES on the vascular and neurological functions of the lower limbs in patients with diabetic ulcers. Both low-frequency, moderate-intensity alternating current and low-intensity or high-voltage direct current have demonstrated efficacy in promoting ulcer healing. The results suggest ES may be a promising approach of managing diabetic ulcers. However, the optimal method of ES application remains undetermined; therefore, high-quality and large-scale studies are essential.

Indexed as

Diabetic FootElectric Stimulation TherapyWound HealingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcomediabetic ulcerelectrical stimulationmeta‐analysis

Identifiers

PMID39675776
PMCPMC11646635

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.