OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of EMT on the healing of pressure ulcers.
SEARCH METHODS: For this update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 10 June 2015); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 6); Ovid MEDLINE (2014 to 10 June 2015); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, 10 June 2015); Ovid EMBASE (2014 to 10 June 2015); and EBSCO CINAHL (2014 to 6 July 2012).
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing EMT with sham EMT or other (standard) treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For this update two review authors independently scrutinised the results of the search to identify relevant RCTs and obtained full reports of potentially eligible studies. In previous versions of the review we made attempts to obtain missing data by contacting study authors. A second review author checked data extraction and disagreements were resolved after discussion between review authors.
MAIN RESULTS: We identified no new trials for this update.Two randomised controlled trials (RCTs), involving 60 participants, at unclear risk of bias were included in the original review. Both trials compared the use of EMT with sham EMT, although one of the trials included a third arm in which only standard therapy was applied. Neither study found a statistically significant difference in complete healing in people treated with EMT compared with those in the control group. In one trial that assessed percentage reduction in wound surface area, the difference between the two groups was reported to be statistically significant in favour of EMT. However, this result should be interpreted with caution as this is a small study and this finding may be due to chance. Additionally, the outcome, percentage reduction in wound area, is less clinically meaningful than complete healing.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results provide no strong evidence of benefit in using EMT to treat pressure ulcers. However, the possibility of a beneficial or harmful effect cannot be ruled out because there were only two included trials, both with methodological limitations and small numbers of participants. Further research is recommended.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of EMT on the healing of venous leg ulcers.
SEARCH METHODS: For this third update, we searched The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 12 November 2012); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 10); Ovid MEDLINE (2011 to November Week 1 2012); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, November 12, 2012); Ovid EMBASE (2011 to 2012 Week 45); and EBSCO CINAHL (2011 to 9 November 2012).
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing EMT with sham-EMT or other treatments.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently scrutinised search results and obtained full reports of potentially eligible studies for further assessment. We extracted and summarised details of eligible studies using a data extraction sheet, and made attempts to obtain missing data by contacting study authors. A second review author checked data extraction, and we resolved disagreements after discussion between review authors.
MAIN RESULTS: Three randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of variable quality involving 94 people were included in the original review; subsequent updates have identified no new trials. All the trials compared the use of EMT with sham-EMT. In the two trials that reported healing rates; one small trial (44 participants) reported that significantly more ulcers healed in the EMT group than the sham-EMT group however this result was not robust to different assumptions about the outcomes of participants who were lost to follow up. The second trial that reported numbers of ulcers healed found no significant difference in healing. The third trial was also small (31 participants) and reported significantly greater reductions in ulcer size in the EMT group however this result may have been influenced by differences in the prognostic profiles of the treatment groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no high quality evidence that electromagnetic therapy increases the rate of healing of venous leg ulcers, and further research is needed.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of EMT on the healing of pressure ulcers.
SEARCH METHODS: For this update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 12 July 2012); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7); Ovid MEDLINE (2010 to July Week 1 2012); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, July 11, 2012); Ovid EMBASE (2010 to 2012 Week 27); and EBSCO CINAHL (2010 to 6 July 2012).
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing EMT with sham EMT or other (standard) treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For this update two review authors independently scrutinised the results of the search to identify relevant RCTs and obtained full reports of potentially eligible studies. In previous versions of the review we made attempts to obtain missing data by contacting study authors. A second review author checked data extraction and disagreements were resolved after discussion between review authors.
MAIN RESULTS: We identified no new trials for this update.Two randomised controlled trials (RCTs), involving 60 participants, at unclear risk of bias were included in the original review. Both trials compared the use of EMT with sham EMT, although one of the trials included a third arm in which only standard therapy was applied. Neither study found a statistically significant difference in complete healing in people treated with EMT compared with those in the control group. In one trial that assessed percentage reduction in wound surface area, the difference between the two groups was reported to be statistically significant in favour of EMT. However, this result should be interpreted with caution as this is a small study and this finding may be due to chance. Additionally, the outcome, percentage reduction in wound area, is less clinically meaningful than complete healing.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results provide no strong evidence of benefit in using EMT to treat pressure ulcers. However, the possibility of a beneficial or harmful effect cannot be ruled out because there were only two included trials, both with methodological limitations and small numbers of participants. Further research is recommended.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of EMT on the healing of venous leg ulcers.
SEARCH METHODS: For this fourth update, we searched The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 30 January 2015); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 12).
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing EMT with sham-EMT or other treatments.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Standard Cochrane Collaboration methods were employed. At least two review authors independently scrutinised search results and obtained full reports of potentially eligible studies for further assessment. We extracted and summarised details of eligible studies using a data extraction sheet, and made attempts to obtain missing data by contacting study authors. A second review author checked data extraction, and we resolved disagreements after discussion between review authors.
MAIN RESULTS: Three randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of low or unclear risk of bias, involving 94 people, were included in the original review; subsequent updates have identified no new trials. All the trials compared the use of EMT with sham-EMT. Meta-analysis of these trials was not possible due to heterogeneity. In the two trials that reported healing rates; one small trial (44 participants) reported that significantly more ulcers healed in the EMT group than the sham-EMT group however this result was not robust to different assumptions about the outcomes of participants who were lost to follow up. The second trial that reported numbers of ulcers healed found no significant difference in healing. The third trial was also small (31 participants) and reported significantly greater reductions in ulcer size in the EMT group however this result may have been influenced by differences in the prognostic profiles of the treatment groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: It is not clear whether electromagnetic therapy influences the rate of healing of venous leg ulcers. Further research would be needed to answer this question.
METHODS: Thirty male Wistar rats were given a 3 centimeter infra-umbilical laparotomy wound, in`flicted on their abdomen. The colonic transection was performed at 5 cm distal to caecum, with end to end anastomosis of colon segment. They were divided into two groups. Group I was fed with standard rat chow and water. Meanwhile, Group II apart from standard feed, was also given TH 1.0 g/kg every morning until day seven post operatively. Afterwards, anastomotic bursting pressures were measured and histopathological examination on the anastomosis line was performed with light microscopes. The data from two groups were analyzed by Independent paired t test for continuous variables.
RESULTS: It was found that the tensile strength of colon anastomosis (95 % CI; p = <0.001) and the histopathological study including fibroblast count (p = <0.001) and inflammatory cells (p = 0.002) showed statistically significant difference in the favor of TH-treated group. Meanwhile, neovascularization formation was not statistically significant (p = 0.807); however, the overall count in the TH group was high.
CONCLUSION: Oral treatment with TH enhances anastomotic wound healing by increasing the number of fibroblasts and by decreasing inflammatory cells leading towards increased wound strength.
METHOD: An open label, comparative, randomised controlled trial enrolling patients who attended the diabetic foot clinic was conducted between August 2022 and August 2023. The primary endpoint was a difference of 20% in wound area reduction with the ACC dressing compared to silver-based dressing within eight weeks. The secondary endpoints were proportion of complete healing, time to healing and adverse events.
RESULTS: The cohort comprised 40 patients. The mean wound reduction percentage at 8 weeks for patients in the ACC arm was 85.40±16.00% compared with 65.08±16.36% in the silver-based dressing arm. Complete healing was observed in six of 20 patients in the ACC arm compared to two of 20 in the silver-based dressing arm.
CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the ACC dressing promotes better ulcer healing in DFU patients than the silver-based dressing.
AIM OF THE STUDY: To investigate the potential of F3 from S. crispus to prevent metastasis in breast cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The antimetastatic effects of F3 were first investigated on murine 4T1 and human MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell (BCC) lines using cell proliferation, wound healing and invasion assays. A 4T1-induced mouse mammary carcinoma model was then used to determine the expression of metastasis tumor markers, epithelial (E)-cadherin, matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-9, mucin (MUC)-1, nonepithelial (N)-cadherin, Twist, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and vimentin, using immunohistochemistry, following oral treatment with F3 for 30 days.
RESULTS: Significant growth arrest was observed with F3 IC50 values of 84.27 µg/ml (24 h) and 74.41 µg/ml (48 h) for MDA-MB-231, and 87.35 µg/ml (24 h) and 78.75 µg/ml (48 h) for 4T1 cells. F3 significantly inhibited migration of both BCC lines at 50 μg/ml for 24 h (p = 0.018 and p = 0.015, respectively). Similarly, significant inhibition of invasion was demonstrated in 4T1 (75 µg/ml, p = 0.016) and MDA-MB-231 (50 µg/ml, p = 0.040) cells compared to the untreated cultures. F3 treatment resulted in reduced tumor growth compared to untreated mice (p