2012PubMedRequires access

The role of surgical debridement in healing of diabetic foot ulcers.

Katherine Gordon, Elizabeth Lebrun, Marjana Tomic‐Canic, Robert S. Kirsner

Open publisher page 32 citations

Abstract

A critical question in the treatment of chronic wounds is whether and when debridement is needed. The three most common chronic wounds are the diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), the venous leg ulcer, and the pressure or decubitus ulcer. Surgical debridement, aimed at removing necrotic, devitalized wound bed and wound edge tissue that inhibits healing, is a longstanding standard of care for the treatment of chronic, nonhealing wounds. Debridement encourages healing by converting a chronic nonhealing wound environment into a more responsive acute healing environment. While the rationale for debridement seems logical, the evidence to support its use in enhancing healing is scarce. Currently, there is more evidence in the literature for debridement for DFUs than for venous ulcers and pressure ulcers; however, the studies on which clinicians have based their rationale for debridement in DFUs possess methodologic flaws, small sample sizes, and bias. Thus, further studies are needed to develop clinical evidence for its inclusion in treatment protocols for chronic wounds. Here, the authors review the scientific evidence for debridement of DFUs, the rationale for debridement of DFUs, and the insufficient data supporting debridement for venous ulcers and pressure ulcers.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A critical question in the treatment of chronic wounds is whether and when debridement is needed. The three most common chronic wounds are the diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), the venous leg ulcer, and the pressure or decubitus ulcer. Surgical debridement, aimed at removing necrotic, devitalized wound bed and wound edge tissue that inhibits healing, is a longstanding standard of care for the treatment of chronic, nonhealing wounds. Debridement encourages healing by converting a chronic nonhealing wound environment into a more responsive acute healing environment. While the rationale for debridement seems logical, the evidence to support its use in enhancing healing is scarce. Currently, there is more evidence in the literature for debridement for DFUs than for venous ulcers and pressure ulcers; however, the studies on which clinicians have based their rationale for debridement in DFUs possess methodologic flaws, small sample sizes, and bias. Thus, further studies are needed to develop clinical evidence for its inclusion in treatment protocols for chronic wounds. Here, the authors review the scientific evidence for debridement of DFUs, the rationale for debridement of DFUs, and the insufficient data supporting debridement for venous ulcers and pressure ulcers.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 32 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A critical question in the treatment of chronic wounds is whether and when debridement is needed. The three most common chronic wounds are the diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), the venous leg ulcer, and the pressure or decubitus ulcer. Surgical debridement, aimed at removing necrotic, devitalized wound bed and wound edge tissue that inhibits healing, is a longstanding standard of care for the treatment of chronic, nonhealing wounds. Debridement encourages healing by converting a chronic nonhealing wound environment into a more responsive acute healing environment. While the rationale for debridement seems logical, the evidence to support its use in enhancing healing is scarce. Currently, there is more evidence in the literature for debridement for DFUs than for venous ulcers and pressure ulcers; however, the studies on which clinicians have based their rationale for debridement in DFUs possess methodologic flaws, small sample sizes, and bias. Thus, further studies are needed to develop clinical evidence for its inclusion in treatment protocols for chronic wounds. Here, the authors review the scientific evidence for debridement of DFUs, the rationale for debridement of DFUs, and the insufficient data supporting debridement for venous ulcers and pressure ulcers.

Key concepts: Medicine, Debridement (dental), Diabetic foot, Diabetic foot ulcer, Surgery, Wound healing, Venous leg ulcer, Surgical debridement

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The role of surgical debridement in healing of diabetic foot ulcers. — Research Paper | ScholarLens