ArticleDiabetes & vascular disease research
A novel approach to diabetes-related foot ulcers/disease: First report of bipolar pulsed RF lumbar sympathetic block.
Article in Diabetes & vascular disease research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundDiabetes-related foot ulcers (DFUs), often complicated by peripheral arterial disease (PAD), remain a major therapeutic challenge. In patients unsuitable for revascularization, alternative treatments are essential. This study is the first to evaluate bipolar radiofrequency (RF) ablation as part of lumbar sympathetic block (LSB) for enhancing wound healing in DFU patients with critical limb ischemia.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study included 31 DFU patients with severe PAD who were not candidates for revascularization. Group 1 (n = 18) received LSB with bipolar RF plus medical care; Group 2 (n = 13) received medical care alone. Wound healing, amputation rates, pain scores (NRS, DN4), and complications were analyzed.ResultsComplete wound healing was significantly higher in Group 1 (55.5%) than in Group 2 (15.3%) (
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.