LETTER TO EDITOR

Diabetic foot. How to achieve control goals?

Mendoza M Pedro.1 Garnica Juan Carlos.2 

• .1Department of Endocrinology, La Raza National Medical Center, Mexican Institute of Social Security IMSS, Mexico City 
• .2 20 de Noviembre National Medical Center, Institute for Social Security and Services for State Workers ISSSTE, Mexico City

Corresponding Author: Mendoza M Pedro, Department of Endocrinology, La Raza National Medical Center, Mexican Institute of Social Security IMSS, Mexico City, Mexico. E-mail: [email protected] 

Received: February 20, 2023                          Published: March 02, 2023 

Citation: Pedro M. Diabetic foot. How to achieve control goals? Int J Complement Intern Med. 2023;4(1):143–149. DOI: 10. 58349/IJCIM. 1. 4. 2023. 00121 

Copyright: ©2023 Mendoza. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and build upon your work non-commercially.

Abstract 

Diabetic foot is a chronic complication that is observed in patients with type 1 and 2 diabetes, mainly related to suboptimal treatment in glycemic control, however, the risk factors that favor the clinical presentation depend on the mechanical, hygienic conditions of the foot, and the decrease in the sensitivity of the foot, which added to the poor control of blood pressure, cholesterol levels and other fats favor an ischemic environment conducive to infection, inadequate healing, which in many patients will end in osteomyelitis and amputation of the foot. affected limb. Numerous workshops aimed at the prevention and treatment of diabetic foot, recommend skin care, changes in footwear and mainly in education so that the patient recognizes the early signs of these complications, the classic treatment for glycemic control is with insulin in its various treatment modalities and there is no solid evidence to suggest that any scheme is superior to another. This review establishes the need for a comprehensive treatment where the goals of glycemic control, hypertensive control, cholesterol levels and ideal weight are the pillars to improve the comprehensive clinical status of the patient in conjunction with the general recommendations for diabetic foot care. 

Keywords: Diabetic foot, Glycemic interventions, Cardiovascular complications

References 

1. Gutierrez JP, Rivera Dommarco J, Shamah Levy T, et al. Encuesta Nacional de Salud y Nutrición 2012. National Results. Cuernavaca, Mexico: National Institute of Public Health (MX), 2012. 

2. Oliver TI, Mutluoglu M. Diabetic Foot Ulcer. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2021. 

3. Singer AJ, Tassiopoulos, Kirsner RS. Evaluation and Management of Lower- Extremity Ulcers. N Engl J Med. 2018; 378(3):302–303. 

4. Ahmad J. The diabetic foot. Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome: Clinical Research & Reviews. 2016;10:48-60. 

5. Wear Magi H, Lee J, Conejero A. Use of topical RAGE in diabetic wounds increased neovascularization and granular tissue formation. Ann Plas Surg. 2004;52:512-522. 

6. Tracy LE, Minasian RA, Caterson EJ. Extracellular matrix and dermal fibroblast function in the healing wound. Adv Wound Care. 2016;5(3):119-136. 

7. Syafril S. Pathophysiology of diabetic foot ulcer. IOP Conf. Ser: Earth Environ Sci. 2018;12161:1- 6. 

8. Hazari A, Maiya AG. Clinical Biomechanics and its Implications on Diabetic Foot. 1st Ed. India: Springer; 2018. 

9. Alavi A, Sibbald RG, Mayer D, et al. Diabetic foot ulcers, part I. Pathophysiology and prevention. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2014; 7(1):1.e1- 1.e18.

10. Sdobler HF, Faist V. Maillard reaction products: uptake, metabolic transit and selected parameters of biopotency and safety. Forum Nutr. 2003;56: 353-355. 

11. Schaper NC. Diabetic foot ulcer classification system for research purposes: a progress report on criteria for including patients in research studies. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2004;20:S90-95. 

12. Islam S. Microbial profile of diabetic foot infections in Trinidad and Tobago. Primary Care Diabetes. 2013;7:303-308. 

13. Abbas Z, Lutale J, Game F, et al. Comparison of four systems of classification of diabetic foot ulcers in Tanzania. Diabetic Medicine. 2008;25(2):134-137. 

14. Chuan F, Tang K, Jiang P, et al. Reliability and validity of the perfusion, extent, depth, infection and sensation (PEDIS) classification system and score in patients with diabetic foot ulcer. PloS one. 2015;10(4):e0124739. 

15. Ince P, Abbas ZG, Lutale JK, et al. Use of the SINBAD classification system and score in comparing outcome of foot ulcer management on three continents. Diabetes care. 2008;31(5):964-967. 

16. Lavery LA, Armstrong DG, Murdoch DP. Validation of the Infectious Diseases Society of America's diabetic foot infection classification system. Clinical infectious diseases. 2007;44(4):562-565. 

17. Monteiro Soares M, Boyko EJ, Jeffcoate W, et al. Diabetic foot ulcer classifications: A critical review. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020;36:e3272. 

18. Mendoza Martínez P, Almeda Valdés P, Janka Zires M, et al. Clinical and microbiological characteristics of patients with diabetic foot. Med Int Mex. 2021;37(2):196-211. 

19. Monteiro Soares M, Russell D, Boyko EJ. International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF). Guidelines on the classification of diabetic foot ulcers (IWGDF 2019). Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020;36 Suppl 1:e3273. 

20. Lindström J, Peltonen M, Eriksson JG, et al. Highfibre, low-fat diet predicts long-term weight loss and decreased type 2 diabetes risk: the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study. Diabetologia. 2006;49(5):912-920. 

21. Laakso M. Hyperglycemia and cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes. 1999;48(5):937-942. 

22. Nieto Martínez R. Physical activity in the prevention and treatment of diabetes. Venezuelan journal of endocrinology and metabolism. 2010;8(2):40-45. 

23. Umpierre D, Ribeiro PAB, Kramer CK, et al. Physical Activity Advice Only or Structured Exercise Training and Association With HbA1c Levels in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA. 2011;305(17):1790-1799. 

24. Mattila TK, De Boer A. Influence of intensive versus conventional glucose control on microvascular and macrovascular complications in type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus. Drugs. 2010;70(17):2229-2245. 

25. Hemmingsen B, Lund SS, Gluud C, et al. Intensive glycaemic control for patients with type 2 diabetes: systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomised clinical trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d6898.

26. Fernando ME, Seneviratne RM, Tan YM, et al. Intensive versus conventional glycaemic control for treating diabetic foot ulcers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016;1. 

27. Shah MS, Brownlee M. Molecular and cellular mechanisms of cardiovascular disorders in diabetes. Circulation Research. 118:1808-1829. 

28. Gaspari T, Liu H Bin, Welungoda I, et al. A GLP1 receptor agonist liraglutide inhibits endothelial cell dysfunction and vascular adhesion molecule expression in an ApoE- /- mouse model. Diabetes and Vascular Disease Research. 2011;8:117-124. 

29. Miranda Fernández Santos C, Egocheaga Cabello MI. Guía práctica de uso de los iSGLT2 en diabetes mellitus tipo 2. Spanish Society of General and Family Physicians; 2020. 

30. Brown E, Wilding JPH, Barber TM, et al. Weight loss variability with SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists in type 2 diabetes mellitus and obesity: Mechanistic possibilities. Obesity Reviews. 2019;20:816-828. 

31. Neal B, Perkovic V, Mahaffey KW, et al. Canagliflozin and cardiovascular and renal events in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:644- 657. 

32. Perkovic V, Jardine MJ, Neal B, et al. Canagliflozin and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:2295-2306. 

33. Ryan PB, Buse JB, Schuemie MJ, et al. Comparative effectiveness of canagliflozin, SGLT2 inhibitors and non-SGLT2 inhibitors on the risk of hospitalization for heart failure and amputation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A real-world meta-analysis of 4 observational databases (OBSERVE-4D). Diabetes ObesMetab. 2018;20(11):2585-2597. 

34. Miyashita S, Kuno T, Takagi H, et al. Risk of amputation associated with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors: A meta- analysis of five randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2020;163:108136.