Wounds : a compendium of clinical research and practice · 2018
Total Contact Cast Use in Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Case Series and Systematic Review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tickner Anthony, Klinghard Cheri, Arnold Jonathan F, Marmolejo Valerie
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: As the majority of diabetic foot ulcerations (DFUs) occur on the plantar foot, excessive pressure is a major contributing factor to delayed healing. The gold standard for offloading is the total contact cast (TCC); yet, TCC use is contraindicated in patients with ischemia. Lower extremity ischemia typically presents in the more severe end stages of peripheral arterial disease (PAD). As PAD exists on a severity spectrum from mild to severe, designation of a clear cutoff where TCC use is an absolute contraindication would assist those who treat DFUs on a daily basis.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine if a potential cutoff value for PAD where TCC use would be an absolute contraindication could be ascertained from a retrospective case series and a systematic literature review of patients with PAD in which treatment included TCC use.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cases series and systematic review of patients with mild to moderate PAD treated with a TCC was performed. All reports of TCC use in patients with PAD and a neuropathic ulceration that included results of noninvasive vascular studies were included.
RESULTS: Results suggested that TCC use is a viable treatment modality for pressure-related DFUs in patients with an ankle pressure ≥ 80 mm Hg, a toe pressure ≥ 74 mm Hg, an ankle-brachial index ≥ 0.55, or a toe-brachial index ≥ 0.55.
CONCLUSIONS: Vascular evaluation, individual risk/benefit analysis, close follow-up, and patient education are essential components of TCC use in these patients. Repeat vascular evaluation is recommended if the wound fails to progress towards resolution with TCC use.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine if a potential cutoff value for PAD where TCC use would be an absolute contraindication could be ascertained from a retrospective case series and a systematic literature review of patients with PAD in which treatment included TCC use.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cases series and systematic review of patients with mild to moderate PAD treated with a TCC was performed. All reports of TCC use in patients with PAD and a neuropathic ulceration that included results of noninvasive vascular studies were included.
RESULTS: Results suggested that TCC use is a viable treatment modality for pressure-related DFUs in patients with an ankle pressure ≥ 80 mm Hg, a toe pressure ≥ 74 mm Hg, an ankle-brachial index ≥ 0.55, or a toe-brachial index ≥ 0.55.
CONCLUSIONS: Vascular evaluation, individual risk/benefit analysis, close follow-up, and patient education are essential components of TCC use in these patients. Repeat vascular evaluation is recommended if the wound fails to progress towards resolution with TCC use.