scholarly journals Effect of cadexomer iodine on the microbial load and diversity of chronic non-healing diabetic foot ulcers complicated by biofilm in vivo

2017 ◽  
Vol 72 (7) ◽  
pp. 2093-2101 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Malone ◽  
K. Johani ◽  
S. O. Jensen ◽  
I. B. Gosbell ◽  
H. G. Dickson ◽  
...  
2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Demetriou ◽  
N. Papanas ◽  
M. Panopoulou ◽  
K. Papatheodorou ◽  
E. Maltezos

2000 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. A26
Author(s):  
I. Mantey ◽  
R.L.R. Hill ◽  
J.J. Wade ◽  
A.V.M. Foster ◽  
M. Bates ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 1477-1486
Author(s):  
Matthew Malone ◽  
Saskia Schwarzer ◽  
Michael Radzieta ◽  
Thomas Jeffries ◽  
Annie Walsh ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 139-144
Author(s):  
Asep Kuswandi ◽  
Kusmiyati Kusmiyati ◽  
Holikin Holikin

AbstrakUlkus diabetikum merupakan salah satu komplikasi kronis diabetes melitus dan menjadi penyebab amputasi kaki. Infeksi pada ulkus tersebut umumnya disebabkan oleh Staphylococcus aureus. Salah satu teknik pencegahan amputasi kaki diabetes adalah perawatan ulkus. Berbagai jenis bahan kompres ulkus diabetikum yang telah dikenal selama ini adalah:kompres madu, gula, Iodine, dan NaCl 0,9%. Penelitian ini bertujuan mengetahui efektifitas bahan kompres ulkus terhadap daya hambat Staphylococcus aureus. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian eksperimen in vitro menggunakan satu faktor perlakuan yaitu zona hambat bahan kompres terhadap Staphylococcus aureus pada ulkus diabetikum. Enam jenis bahan yang diuji adalah aquadest, gula, Iodine 10%, campuran gula dan Iodine 10 %, madu, dan NaCl 0,9 %. Eksperimen dilakukan sebanyak 10 kali untuk mengetahui rerata luas daya hambatnya selama 24 jam. Sampel diambil dari ulkus diabetikum. Staphylococcus aureus diisolasi dari ulkus tersebut untuk eksperimen dengan berbagai bahan kompres ulkus. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa zona hambat madu rata-rata sebesar 0,4 mm, gula 3,0 mm, aquadest 0,0 mm, NaCl 0,9% 0,0 mm, Iodine 10% 8,3 mm dan campuran gula-Iodine 6,0 mm. Zona hambat terluas dihasilkan dari uji menggunakkan Iodine 10% (8,3 mm). Sementara campuran gula Iodine 10% menghasilkan zona hambat seluas 6 mm dan gula menghasilkan 3 mm. Penelitian ini merekomendasikan jika ditemukan Staphylococcus aureus maka dilakukan kompres Iodine 10% dengan kasa steril. Penelitian selanjutnya dengan metode in vivo perlu dilakukan untuk mengetahui efektifitas cairan Iodine pada ulkus diabetikum.Kata Kunci: kompres ulkus, staphylococcus aureus, ulkus diabetikum, zona hambatAbstractEffectivity of Iodine Compress to Blocking Zone of Staphylococcus aureus in Diabetes Ulcers. Diabetic foot ulcers is one of diabetes chronic complications that might lead to leg amputations. Staphylococcus aureus is known as the cause of infection in diabetic foot ulcers. One of techniques to prevent diabetic foot amputations is wound care. Various materials are known to be used to compress diabetic foot ulcers. These include of using honey, sugar, 10% of Iodine and 0.9% of NaCl. This study aimed ttify to identify the effectiveness of various wound care materials to block Staphylococcus aureus. This is an in vitro experiment study to investigate the effetiveness of six wound care materials used to wounds compress: distilled water, sugar, 10% of Iodine, a mixture of sugar and Iodine, honey and 0.9% of NaCl. Experiments were carried out in 10 times to determine the average size of block area in 24 hours. Staphylococcus aureus were isolated and soiled with various wound compressss materialls. The results showed that honey produced 0.4 mm of a blocking zone, 3.0 mm for glucose, 0.0 mm for distilled water, 0.0 mm for 0.9% of NaCl, 8.3 mm for 10% of Iodine, and 6.0 mm for mixed-Iodine Sugar. Ten percents of Iodine produced the widest zone to block Staphylicoccus aureus. This study recommends of apllying a 10% of Iodine compress if there is a positive culture of Staphylococcus aureus. A further in vivo study is a necessity to investigate the effectiveness of Iodine to diabetes foot ulcers.Keywords: blocking zone, diabetic foot ulcers, Staphylococcus aureus, wound compress


2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue E. Gardner ◽  
Stephen L. Hillis ◽  
Rita A. Frantz

Aims. One proposed method to diagnose diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) for infection is clinical examination. Twelve different signs of infection have been reported. The purpose of this study was to examine diagnostic validity of each individual clinical sign, a combination of signs recommended by the Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA), and a composite predictor based on all signs of localized wound infection in identifying DFU infection, among a sample of DFUs. Methods. A cross-sectional research design was used. Sixty-four individuals with DFUs were recruited from a Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center and an academic-affiliated hospital. Each DFU was independently assessed by 2 research team members using the clinical signs and symptoms checklist. Tissue specimens were then obtained via wound biopsy and quantitatively processed. Ulcers with more than 106 organisms per gram of tissue were defined as having high microbial load. Individual signs and the IDSA combination were assessed for validity by calculating sensitivity, specificity, and concordance probability. The composite predictor was analyzed using c-index and receiver operating curves. Results. Twenty-five (39%) of the DFUs had high microbial loads. No individual sign was a significant predictor of high microbial load. The IDSA combination was not a significant predictor either. The c-index of the composite predictor was .645 with a 95% confidence interval of .559-.732. Conclusions. Individual signs of infection do not perform well nor does the IDSA combination of signs. However, a composite predictor based on all signs provides a moderate level of discrimination, suggesting clinical use. Larger sample sizes and alternate reference standards are recommended.


1998 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 355-359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lene Simonsen ◽  
Per Holstein ◽  
Kirsten Larsen ◽  
Jens Bülow

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 121-122
Author(s):  
Olufunmilayo Adeleye ◽  
Ejiofor Ugwu ◽  
Anthonia Ogbera ◽  
Akinola Dada ◽  
Ibrahim Gezawa ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document