Search

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has created challenges in the diagnosis and management of colorectal cancer (CRC). It was proposed in regional Northern Australia that the distance to services could further impact cancer outcomes, leading to delayed diagnosis. The authors compared the outcomes of patients prior and during the pandemic; with a focus on whether patients were presenting in the emergency setting with more advanced disease. The distance to treatment was also analysed to see if there was any impact to the management of patients with colorectal cancer., Methods: A retrospective analysis of 444 patients who underwent treatment for colorectal cancer over two time periods was examined. Time period 1 (prior to COVID-19); March 2017-July 2019 and time period 2 (during COVID-19); March 2020-July 2022. Only patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma were included if they were primarily treated at a hospital in northern Australia; those with benign pathologies or recurrent disease were also excluded. Data was collected in terms of treatment and outcomes and compared between the two groups. A separate analysis of whether locality affected outcomes and referral times was also performed., Results: In the time period prior to COVID-19, 174 patients' required invasive management, while in the second time period during COVID-19, there were 188 patients managed surgically or endoscopically. Of the patients managed prior to COVID-19 17/174 (9.8%) patients required emergency interventions, during COVID-19 this number increased to 37/188 (19.7%). This difference was deemed to be statistically significant ( P = 0.008). No substantial difference in cancer staging at presentation was found between the two groups. There was an increase in complication rate found during COVID-19 34.6 vs 25.5% prior to COVID-19 ( P =0.046). During COVID-19, the median time between General Practitioner (primary care physician) referral and colonoscopy was actually lower than prior to covid 26.5 vs 36 days ( P =0.047). When comparing local to distant patients, we found locally based patients had lower rates of neoadjuvant treatment 18.9 vs 30.4% ( P =0.018) and higher rates of open surgery 39.1 vs 26.5%, P = 0.012. An increase in time between colonoscopy and outpatient department review (OPD) was seen in patients not from the local area 13 vs 18 days ( P = 0.006)., Conclusion: The authors found during the COVID-19 pandemic a greater proportion of patients were presenting with colorectal cancer that required emergency intervention. This may be due to decreased presentations to general practitioners due to lockdown causing potential delays in diagnosis. The authors did not see more advanced disease in these patients presenting emergently, between the two groups. Further assessment of local patients' vs patients from distant sites, showed difference in how patients were managed but similar outcomes. Our large catchment area with distance to treatment in Northern Australia may further impact the management of colorectal cancer in the future., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is the most common cause of prolonged hospitalization with a high cost of care due to unsatisfactory outcomes with the current mode of therapy. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) is a new technology in the care of nonhealing wounds. The study's main objective was to compare the healing parameters of DFUs between patients undergoing the standard of care (SOC) alone and ESWT + SOC. The secondary objective was to assess inflammatory markers in both study groups. The study was designed as a single-center, randomized trial to provide evidence on the effects of ESWT on DFU healing. Informed consent was obtained from all participants before enrolment. Forty-eight participants were recruited, enrolled, and randomly allocated into the 2 study groups. Twenty-five patients were allocated to the ESWT + SOC group, and 23 patients were allocated into the SOC-only group for a treatment period of 6 weeks. The univariate binary analysis showed more patients with healed DFU in the ESWT + SOC group than the SOC-only group at 6 weeks, though the difference did not reach statistical significance (OR = 3.2, p = .07). The adjusted multivariate binary analysis confirmed this finding; however, the effect size did not reach statistical significance at 6 weeks (OR = 3.9, p = .08). The level of circulating inflammatory markers was similar in both groups of patients. It is the author's opinion that there is a potential benefit of ESWT on diabetic wound healing with further research warranted to determine its role in treatment of DFU. A larger trial with a more extended treatment period is, however, needed to substantiate our findings., (Copyright © 2023 the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) are one of the leading long-term complications experienced by patients with diabetes. Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4is) are a class of antihyperglycemic medications prescribed to patients with diabetes to manage glycaemic control. DPP4is may also have a beneficial effect on DFU healing. This study aimed to determine vildagliptin's effect on inflammatory markers and wound healing., Trial Design: Prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-center study., Methods: Equal number of participants were randomized into the treatment and placebo groups. The treatment was for 12 weeks, during which the participants had regular visits to the podiatrist, who monitored their DFU sizes using 3D camera, and blood samples were taken at baseline, six weeks, and 12 weeks during the study for measurement of inflammatory markers. In addition, demographic characteristics, co-morbidities, DFU risk factors, and DFU wound parameters were recorded., Results: 50 participants were recruited for the study, with 25 assigned to placebo and 25 to treatment group. Vildagliptin treatment resulted in a statistically significant reduction of HBA1c (p < 0.02) and hematocrit (p < 0.04), total cholesterol (p < 0.02), LDL cholesterol (p < 0.04), and total/HDL cholesterol ratio (P < 0.03) compared to the placebo group. Also, vildagliptin had a protective effect on DFU wound healing, evidenced by the odds ratio (OR) favoring the intervention of 11.2 (95% CI 1.1-113.5; p < 0.04) and the average treatment effect on the treated (ATET) for vildagliptin treatment group showed increased healing by 35% (95%CI; 10-60, p = 0.01) compared to placebo with the model adjusted for microvascular complications, smoking, amputation, dyslipidemia, peripheral vascular disease (PVD) and duration of diabetes., Conclusions: Vildagliptin treatment was effective in healing DFU in addition to controlling the diabetes. Our findings support the use of DPP4is as a preferred option for treating ulcers in patients with diabetes. Further studies on a larger population are warranted to confirm our findings and understand how DPP4is could affect inflammation and DFU healing., (© 2022. Crown.)

Introduction: Infected diabetic foot is the leading cause of hospital admissions for people with diabetes mellitus. Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) causes high morbidity and significant mortality. Current diagnostic tests for DFO are either expensive, invasive, or of low diagnostic yield., Objective: The objective of the study was to determine whether serum levels of procalcitonin (PCT), an inflammatory marker, differ between DFO and diabetic foot ulcers without osteomyelitis (ie, cellulitis) as controls. The authors also aimed to assess the usefulness of PCT in diagnosing DFO., Methods: A case-control study was designed comparing DFO with diabetic foot cellulitis as the control. Patients were classified as having osteomyelitis and cellulitis based on the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot diagnostic criteria. Serum inflammatory markers PCT, adiponectin, C-reactive protein-1, osteoprotegerin (OPG), osteopontin (OPN), and interleukin 6 (IL-6) were analyzed in patients with DFO and controls., Results: The median serum procalcitonin was significantly higher in the DFO group 108.5 pg/mL (range, 65.0-124.0 pg/mL) compared with 57.0 pg/mL (range, 37.2-77.0 pg/mL) controls (P = .02). Procalcitonin had a sensitivity of 79% compared with 50%, 63%, 66%, and 75% for adiponectin, OPG, OPN, and IL-6, respectively. Procalcitonin had a specificity of 70% compared with 50%, 71%, 70%, and 64%. Receiver operator characteristic curves showed a value of area under the curve of 0.73 and 0.77 for PCT and IL-6 compared with 0.4, 0.6, and 0.6 for adiponectin, OPG, and OPN, respectively., Conclusions: In this study, procalcitonin was a useful diagnostic test for DFOs and provided distinct diagnostic discrimination between DFO from cellulitis. It may serve as a useful marker for diagnosing DFO. Further studies in a larger population are needed to verify the findings.

Aims: To evaluate outcomes of diabetic inpatient hypoglycemia among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) compared with Australian Caucasian patients., Methods: A retrospective audit of diabetic patients aged > 18 years admitted at a regional hospital general ward between April 1, 2015, and March 31, 2016, was analyzed. The database contains clinical information at the time of admission and initial discharge and readmission within 4 weeks thereafter., Results: A total of 1618 (of 6027) patients were admitted with diabetes representing 23.7% of the total ward admissions, of which 484 (29.9%) had inpatient hypoglycemia. Of the 91 patients with available data analyzed, ATSI origin with inpatient hypoglycemia was associated with longer length of stay (LOS) (hazard ratio [HR], 2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-3.5), whereas severe hypoglycemia (≤ 2.2 mmol/L) in both ATSI and non-ATSI was significantly associated with longer LOS (HR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2-4.2). No significant differences in LOS were found for gender, age, and Carlson comorbidity index (CCI). The adjusted model for likelihood of readmission, gender, indigenous status, and CCI were not significant risk factors for readmission to the hospital. Readmitted patients were older (50-59 years vs < 50 years, P  = 0.001; 60-69 years vs < 50 years, P  = 0.032; 70+ years vs < 50 years, P  = 0.031)., Conclusion: We reported high rate of inpatient hypoglycemia in our study population. Indigenous Australian diabetic patients with inpatient hypoglycemia had significantly longer LOS compared with non-Indigenous Caucasian counterparts. Further prospective studies on a larger population are needed to confirm our findings., (© Endocrine Society 2020.)

Diabetic Foot Ulcers (DFUs) are major complications associated with diabetes and often correlate with peripheral neuropathy, trauma and peripheral vascular disease. It is necessary to understand the molecular and genetic basis of diabetic foot ulcers in order to tailor patient centred care towards particular patient groups. This review aimed to evaluate whether current literature was indicative of an underlying molecular and genetic basis for DFUs and to discuss clinical applications. From a molecular perspective, wound healing is a process that transpires following breach of the skin barrier and is usually mediated by growth factors and cytokines released by specialised cells activated by the immune response, including fibroblasts, endothelial cells, phagocytes, platelets and keratinocytes. Growth factors and cytokines are fundamental in the organisation of the molecular processes involved in making cutaneous wound healing possible. There is a significant role for single nucleotide polymorphism (SNPs) in the fluctuation of these growth factors and cytokines in DFUs. Furthermore, recent evidence suggests a key role for epigenetic mechanisms such as DNA methylation from long standing hyperglycemia and non-coding RNAs in the complex interplay between genes and the environment. Genetic factors and ethnicity can also play a significant role in the development of diabetic neuropathy leading to DFUs. Clinically, interventions which have improved outcomes for people with DFUs or those at risk of DFUs include some systemic therapeutic drug interventions which improve microvascular blood flow, surgical interventions, human growth factors, and hyperbaric oxygen therapy, negative pressure wound therapy, skin replacement or shockwave therapy and the use of topical treatments. Future treatment modalities including stem cell and gene therapies are promising in the therapeutic approach to prevent the progression of chronic diabetic complications., (Copyright © 2016 Tissue Viability Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)