Vacuum-assisted closure versus conventional dressings in the management of diabetic foot ulcers: a prospective case–control study

Abstract

Objective

To compare the effectiveness of vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) versus conventional dressings in the healing of diabetic foot ulcerations (DFUs) in terms of healing rate (time to prepare the wound for closure either spontaneously or by surgery), safety, and patient satisfaction.

Methods

Randomized case–control study enrolling 56 patients, divided into two groups. Group A (patients treated with VAC) and Group B (patients treated with conventional dressings), with an equal number of patients in each group. DFUs were treated until wound closure, either spontaneously, surgically, or until completion of the 8-week period.

Results

Granulation tissue appeared in 26 (92.85%) patients by the end of Week 2 in Group A, while it appeared in 15 (53.57%) patients by that time in Group B. 100% granulation was achieved in 21 (77.78%) patients by the end of Week 5 in Group A as compared to only 10 (40%) patients by that time in Group B. Patients in Group A had fewer number of positive blood cultures, secondary amputations and were satisfied with treatment as compared to Group B.

Conclusion

VAC appears to be more effective, safe, and patient satisfactory compared to conventional dressings for the treatment of DFUs.

• diabetic foot ulcer
• infections
• conventional dressings
• vacuum-assisted closure
• wound closure

Conflict of interest and funding

The authors have no conflict of interest. The authors have not received any funding or benefits from industry to conduct this study.