Maggot therapy for chronic ulcer: A retrospective cohort and a meta-analysis

Maggot wound therapy (MWT) has been used in various wounds including diabetic foot ulcers, venous leg ulcers, pressure ulcers, and acute surgical wounds. However, the efficacy of MWT therapy has been controversial. We therefore conducted a cohort study and a meta-analysis to assess MWT effects. A retrospective cohort study was performed in diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) patients who were treated with MWT or conventional wound therapy (CWT) in Thailand. The Kaplan-Meier curve was applied to estimate the healing probability. A meta-analysis was performed to pool our study with four previous cohort studies identified from Medline and Scopus. The estimated incidence of wound healing was 5.7/100 (95% CI: 4.49, 7.32) patients-week, and the median time to healing was 14 weeks. The hazard ratio (HR) of wound healing was 7.87 times significantly higher in the MWT than the CWT (p < 0.001) after adjusting for duration and size of ulcers, ankle brachial index (ABI), and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Meta-analysis was applied and suggested that the treatment effects were moderately heterogeneous {Chi-square = 6.18 [degrees of freedom (d.f.) = 4], p = 0.186, I2 = 35.2%}, with the pooled risk ratio (RR) of 1.77 [95% confidence intervals (CI) = 1.01, 3.11], i.e., the chance of wound healing was 20% significantly higher with MWT than CWT. The average costs of treatment in patients with DFU were lower in the MWT group than in the CWT group, with medians of US$292.82 and US$490, respectively. Our evidence suggests that MWT is significantly better for wound healing and more cost-effective than CWT. An updated meta-analysis or large scale randomized controlled trial (RCT) is required to confirm this effect

Diagnostic scores for appendicitis: a systematic review of scores' performance

Aims: Several scoring systems have been developed for diagnosis of appendicitis. This study aims to systematically explore how those scores were derived and validated, and to compare their performance. Study Design: Systematic review. Place and Duration of Study: We searched Medline from 1949 and EMBASE from 1974 to March 2012 to identify relevant articles published in English. Methodology: Information about model development and performance was extracted. The "risk of bias" assessment tool was developed based on a critical appraisal guide for clinical prediction rules. Calibration (O/E ratio) and discrimination (C-statistic) coefficients were estimated. A meta-analysis was applied to pool calibration coefficients and C-statistics. Results: Forty-four out of 468 studies were eligible. Of these, 14 developed or modified diagnostic scoring systems and 30 validated existing models. Four scores had been most frequently validated, i.e., Alvarado, modified Alvarado, Fenyo, and Eskelinen. Among them, only the Eskelinen model was derived based on a multivariate regression whereas the rest used univariate or non-statistical methodology. All studies reported very good but imprecise calibration. For discrimination, the pooled C-statistics for these corresponding scores were 0.77, 0.86, 0.81, and 0.84 respectively. In the external validation, the discriminative performance decreased about 25.3% and 10.1% for the Alvarado and Fenyo scores respectively. Conclusion: The research methods for scoring systems of appendicitis were inconsistent. More efficient scoring systems which have been internally and externally validated are required

Maggot therapy for chronic ulcer: a retrospective cohort and a meta-analysis

Background/Objective: Maggot wound therapy (MWT) has been used in various wounds including diabetic foot ulcers, venous leg ulcers, pressure ulcers, and acute surgical wounds. However, the efficacy of MWT therapy has been controversial. We therefore conducted a cohort study and a meta-analysis to assess MWT effects. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed in diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) patients who were treated with MWT or conventional wound therapy (CWT) in Thailand. The Kaplan-Meier curve was applied to estimate the healing probability. A meta-analysis was performed to pool our study with four previous cohort studies identified from Medline and Scopus. Results: The estimated incidence of wound healing was 5.7/100 (95% CI: 4.49, 7.32) patients-week, and the median time to healing was 14 weeks. The hazard ratio (HR) of wound healing was 7.87 times significantly higher in the MWT than the CWT (<i>p</i> < 0.001) after adjusting for duration and size of ulcers, ankle brachial index (ABI), and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). Meta-analysis was applied and suggested that the treatment effects were moderately heterogeneous {Chi-square = 6.18 [degrees of freedom (d.f.) = 4]; <i>p</i> = 0.186; I² = 35.2%}, with the pooled risk ratio (RR) of 1.77 [95% confidence intervals (CI) = 1.01, 3.11], i.e., the chance of wound healing was 20% significantly higher with MWT than CWT. The average costs of treatment in patients with DFU were lower in the MWT group than in the CWT group, with medians of US$292.82 and US$490, respectively. Conclusion: Our evidence suggests that MWT is significantly better for wound healing and more cost-effective than CWT. An updated meta-analysis or large scale randomized controlled trial (RCT) is required to confirm this effect

La Charente

24 décembre 18851885/12/24 (A14,N5435)-1885/12/24.Appartient à l’ensemble documentaire : PoitouCh

La Charente

06 avril 18791879/04/06 (A8,N2121)-1879/04/06.Appartient à l’ensemble documentaire : PoitouCh

La Charente

12 août 18831883/08/12 (A12,N5029)-1883/08/12.Appartient à l’ensemble documentaire : PoitouCh