Diabetic Foot Infections: Current Diagnosis and Treatment

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a global epidemic, and diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is one of its most serious and costly complications. DFUs result from a complex interaction of a number of risk factors. Once the protective layer of skin is broken, deep tissues are exposed to bacterial infection that progresses rapidly. Patients with DFUs frequently require amputations of the lower limbs and, in more than half the cases, infection is the preponderant factor. Given the challenges of treating these complex infections, this paper aims to provide a hospital-based framework for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections (DFIs). We propose a treatment-oriented assessment of DFIs based on a cross-examination of the medical, foot, and wound history; a systemized and detailed physical examination; and the results of complementary diagnostic procedures. We stress the need for a clinical diagnosis of DFIs and the importance of microbiological evaluation for antibiotic therapy guidance. Regarding treatment, we propose a multidisciplinary approach prioritizing invasive infection drainage, necrosis debridement, and the prompt start of empirical antibiotic therapy, followed by complete and appropriate vascular reconstruction. For severe DFIs, we suggest that negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) be included in the treatment pathway. We also provide rules for managing particular situations, such as osteomyelitis. It is our hope that this protocol will improve the hospital management of DFIs and, ultimately, the prognosis of DFI patients.

Stress-Related Mucosal Disease: Incidence of Bleeding and the Role of Omeprazole in its Prophylaxis

BACKGROUND: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is the severe complication of stress-related mucosal disease in hospitalized patients. In intensive care units (ICU), risk factors are well defined and only mechanical ventilation and coagulopathy proved to be relevant for significant bleeding. On the contrary, in non-ICU settings there is no consensus about this issue. Nevertheless, omeprazole is still widely used in prophylaxis of bleeding. The objective of our study was to evaluate the relevance of stress-related mucosal disease bleeding in patients admitted to an internal medicine ward, and the role of omeprazole in its prophylaxis. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study in which we analysed consecutive patients who were admitted to our ward over a year. We recorded demographic characteristics of the patients, potential risk factors for stress-related mucosal disease (clinical data, laboratory, and medication), administration of prophylactic omeprazole, and total cost of this prophylaxis. Patients with active gastrointestinal bleeding on the admission were excluded. We recorded every upper gastrointestinal bleeding event with clinical relevance. RESULTS: Five hundred and thirty-five patients, mean age 70 years, mean length of stay 9.6+/-7.7 days; 140 (26.2%) patients were treated with 40 mg of omeprazole intravenously, 193 (36.1%) with 20mg of omeprazole orally, and 202 (37.8%) patients had no prophylaxis. There was only one episode (0.2%) of clinically relevant bleeding. CONCLUSION: In patients admitted to an internal medicine ward, incidence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding as a complication of stress-related mucosal disease is low. We found that there is no advantage in prophylaxis with omeprazole.

Intraocular Pressure in Eyes Receiving Intravitreal Antivascular Endothelial Growth Factor Injections

PURPOSE: The aim of the this study was to determine the effect of intravitreal antivascular endothelial growth factor injections on intraocular pressure (IOP) and identify possible risk factors for the development of increased IOP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study included a total of 106 eyes receiving intravitreal injection of bevacizumab as treatment for macular edema or active choroidal neovascularization. IOP was measured by Goldmann applanation tonometry immediately before the intravitreal injection and 5 min, 1 h and 15 days after the procedure. The records of the study patients were reviewed for age, gender, history of glaucoma, diabetes mellitus, phakic status, systemic and topical medication and number of previous injections. Subconjunctival reflux was registered. IOP elevation was defined as IOP ≥21 mm Hg and/or a change from baseline of ≥5 mm Hg recorded at least on two or more measurements on the same visit. RESULTS: Mean preoperative IOP was 15.31 ± 3.90 mm Hg and postoperative IOP values were 27.27 ± 11.87 mm Hg (after 5 min), 17.59 ± 6.24 mm Hg (after 1 h) and 16.86 ± 3.62 mm Hg (after 15 days). The IOP variation was statistically significant between pre- and postoperative measurements (p < 0.05). Subconjunctival reflux was recorded in 11.3%, and in this subgroup the IOP at 5 min and at 1 h was lower than preoperative IOP (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: More than one third of the eyes achieved IOPs >30 mm Hg 5 min after injection. Subconjunctival reflux contributed to a lower mean postoperative IOP (p < 0.05). Considerations for the management include prophylactic IOP lowering with medical therapy and/or preinjection ocular decompression for patients with a history of glaucoma or ocular hypertension and switching to an as-needed injection protocol in patients suffering a marked IOP rise in previous injections. © 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Health-Related Quality of Life Impact of a Triple Combination of Olmesartan Medoxomil, Amlodipine Besylate and Hydrochlorotiazide in Subjects with Hypertension

BACKGROUND: A post-hoc analysis was performed on the data from a 54 weeks phase III study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00923091) to measure changes in the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of 2,690 patients aged ≥18 with moderate-to-severe hypertension who received one of six doses of olmesartan/amlodipine/hydrochlorothiazide (OLM/AML/HCTZ), using the MINICHAL and EQ-5D instruments. METHODS: Descriptive statistics were used to assess blood pressure and HRQoL scores over the study period. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to identify those factors that could possibly have influenced HRQoL. Linear regression was used to assess the relationship between changes in blood pressure and HRQoL scores. RESULTS: Patients' baseline MINICHAL mood and somatic domains scores were 5.5 and 2.6. Over the study period HRQoL improved as both MINICHAL scores decreased by 31-33%. Patients' baseline EQ-5D index and VAS scores were 0.9 and 73.4 respectively, increasing by 6% and 12% over the study period. Patients' QALY gain over the 54 weeks study period was estimated to be 0.029 QALYs. The ANCOVA showed that changes in patients' HRQoL was likely to have been influenced by patients' achievement of blood pressure control, the amount of concomitant medication and patients' last used dosage strength of antihypertensive. Linear regression showed that blood pressure improvement may have been associated with improved HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that OLM/AML/HCTZ reduced blood pressure and significantly increased blood pressure control whilst improving patients' HRQoL. Achieving blood pressure control, amount of concomitant medication and dosage strength of antihypertensive impacted on patients' HRQoL.