↓ Skip to main content

Cellular versus acellular matrix devices in treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: study protocol for a comparative efficacy randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
147 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cellular versus acellular matrix devices in treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: study protocol for a comparative efficacy randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-14-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hadar Lev-Tov, Chin-Shang Li, Sara Dahle, Roslyn Rivkah Isseroff

Abstract

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) represent a significant source of morbidity and an enormous financial burden. Standard care for DFUs involves systemic glucose control, ensuring adequate perfusion, debridement of nonviable tissue, off-loading, control of infection, local wound care and patient education, all administered by a multidisciplinary team. Unfortunately, even with the best standard of care (SOC) available, only 24% or 30% of DFUs will heal at weeks 12 or 20, respectively.The extracellular matrix (ECM) in DFUs is abnormal and its impairment has been proposed as a key target for new therapeutic devices. These devices intend to replace the aberrant ECM by implanting a matrix, either devoid of cells or enhanced with fibroblasts, keratinocytes or both as well as various growth factors. These new bioengineered skin substitutes are proposed to encourage angiogenesis and in-growth of new tissue, and to utilize living cells to generate cytokines needed for wound repair.To date, the efficacy of bioengineered ECM containing live cellular elements for improving healing above that of a SOC control group has not been compared with the efficacy of an ECM devoid of cells relative to the same SOC. Our hypothesis is that there is no difference in the improved healing effected by either of these two product types relative to SOC.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 144 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 19%
Student > Bachelor 18 12%
Student > Master 17 12%
Other 16 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 5%
Other 25 17%
Unknown 35 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 8%
Engineering 9 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 5%
Other 20 14%
Unknown 43 29%