Cochrane · systematic review · CD010318

Negative pressure wound therapy for treating foot wounds in people with diabetes mellitus

Liu, Z, Dumville, JC, Hinchliffe, RJ, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2018 · Cochrane Library

Wounds2 versionsAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
21
current version
GRADE rated
12
No studies
9
Included studies
NR
No studies 9 · 42.9%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 6 · 28.6%Low 6 · 28.6%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Questions and results

Show all 2 versions

NPWT compared with dressings for postoperative foot wounds in people with diabetes mellitus

Population: treating foot wounds in people with diabetes mellitus
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Proportion of wounds healed
NPWT vs dressings
RR 1.44 [1.03, 2.01]1 study · 162 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Time to healing
NPWT vs dressings
HR 1.91 [1.21, 2.99]1 study · 162 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Amputations
NPWT vs dressings
RR 0.38 [0.14, 1.02]2 studies · 292 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Number of wounds closed or covered with surgery
NPWT vs dressings
RR 1.02 [0.95, 1.09]1 study · 130 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Adverse events
NPWT vs dressings
RR 0.96 [0.72, 1.28]1 study · 162 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Cost‐effectiveness
NPWT vs dressings
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Wound recurrence
NPWT vs dressings
no estimate extractedNRNo studies

NPWT compared with dressings for foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus

Population: treating foot wounds in people with diabetes mellitus
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Proportion of wounds healed
NPWT vs dressings
RR 1.4 [1.14, 1.72]5 studies · 486 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Time to healing
NPWT vs dressings
no estimate extracted3 studies · 468 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Amputations
NPWT vs dressings
RR 0.33 [0.15, 0.7]3 studies · 441 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Number of wounds closed or covered with surgery
NPWT vs dressings
RR 1.02 [0.85, 1.24]3 studies · 129 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Adverse events
NPWT vs dressings
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Cost‐effectiveness
NPWT vs dressings
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Wound recurrence
NPWT vs dressings
RR 0.5 [0.1, 2.53]1 study · 60 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Low‐pressure compared with high‐pressure NPWT for foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus

Population: treating foot wounds in people with diabetes mellitus
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Proportion of wounds healed
Low‐pressure vs high‐pressure NPWT
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Time to ulcer healing
Low‐pressure vs high‐pressure NPWT
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Amputation
Low‐pressure vs high‐pressure NPWT
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Number of wounds closed or covered with surgery
Low‐pressure vs high‐pressure NPWT
RR 0.83 [0.47, 1.47]1 study · 40 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Adverse events
Low‐pressure vs high‐pressure NPWT
RR 1.5 [0.28, 8.04]1 study · 40 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Cost‐effectiveness
Low‐pressure vs high‐pressure NPWT
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Wound recurrence
Low‐pressure vs high‐pressure NPWT
no estimate extractedNRNo studies