Stimul W® y Heberprot-P® unidos en el tratamiento de la úlcera del pie diabético / Stimul W® and Heberprot-P® combined for treating diabetic foot ulcer

Introducción: Las úlceras del pie diabético resultan las complicaciones más frecuentes en las personas con diabetes. Se conocen diferentes formas de tratamiento para esta enfermedad, con más o menos efectividad, pero no resuelven el problema en la totalidad de los casos. El estimulador eléctrico Stimul W® y el medicamento Heberprot-P® se han empleado, de manera independiente y con resultados satisfactorios, como alternativas para el tratamiento de estas lesiones. Comprobar si la acción combinada de ambos procedimientos permite alcanzar mejores resultados, permitiría contribuir a resolver un problema de alta prevalencia mundial. Objetivo: Exponer el resultado de la aplicación de la combinación del estimulador Stimul W® y el medicamento Heberprot-P® en el tratamiento de un paciente con úlcera del pie diabético. Presentación del caso: Paciente masculino de 69 años de edad, con diabetes mellitus de tipo 2, que presentaba una úlcera del pie diabético en la parte externa del pie derecho, con abundante tejido necrótico en forma de fístula en la base de los dos dedos restantes y falta de granulación. Los tratamientos anteriores no dieron el resultado esperado. Se decidió, como terapia de curación, aplicar durante 12 sesiones la combinación del estimulador Stimul W® y el medicamento Heberprot-P®. Conclusiones: Se logró la cicatrización de la lesión, al obtener un 100 por ciento de tejido de granulación y la disminución significativa de sus dimensiones, lo que mostró que la terapia aplicada constituye una alternativa para el tratamiento de este tipo de úlcera(AU)

Introduction: Diabetic foot ulcers are the most frequent complications in people with diabetes. Different forms of treatment for this disease are known, with more or less effectiveness; but they do not solve the problem in all cases. The electrical stimulator Stimul W® and the drug Heberprot-P® have been used independently, and with satisfactory outcomes, as alternatives for the treatment of these lesions. Checking whether the combined action of both procedures allows to achieve better outcomes would contribute to solve a problem of high worldwide prevalence. Objective: To present the outcomes of applying the combination of the stimulator Stimul W® and the drug Heberprot-P® for treating a patient with diabetic foot ulcer. Case presentation: A 69-year-old male patient, with type 2 diabetes mellitus, who presented with a diabetic foot ulcer on the outside of the right foot, with abundant necrotic tissue in the form of a fistula at the base of the two remaining toes and lack of granulation. The previous treatments did not permit the expected outcomes. It was decided, as a healing therapy, to apply the combination of the stimulator Stimul W® and the drug Heberprot-P® for twelve sessions. Conclusions: Healing of the lesion was achieved by obtaining 100 percent granulation tissue and a significant reduction in its dimensions, which showed that the applied therapy constitutes an alternative for the treatment of this type of ulcer(AU)

Lesión isquémica del tercer dedo del pie izquierdo / Ischemic injure of the third toe of the left foot

Paciente EMC, masculino, 76 años, aún trabajador agrícola. Estado físico: conservado. Antecedentes de salud hasta hace más/menos un año que comienza con claudicación a la marcha en ambos miembros inferiores, más marcada en el izquierdo. En estos momentos el dolor se establece en reposo y aparece lesión seca en el tercer dedo del pie izquierdo...

Buddy Taping: Is It a Safe Method for Treatment of Finger and Toe Injuries?

BACKGROUND: Buddy taping is a well known and useful method for treating sprains, dislocations, and other injuries of the fingers or toes. However, the authors have often seen complications associated with buddy taping such as necrosis of the skin, infections, loss of fixation, and limited joint motion. To our knowledge, there are no studies regarding the complications of buddy taping. The purpose of this study was to report the current consensus on treating finger and toe injuries and complications of buddy taping by using a specifically designed questionnaire. METHODS: A questionnaire was designed for this study, which was regarding whether the subjects were prescribed buddy taping to treat finger and toe injuries, reasons for not using it, in what step of injury treatment it was use, indications, complications, kinds of tape for fixation, and special methods for preventing skin injury. Fifty-five surgeons agreed to participate in the study and the survey was performed in a direct interview manner at the annual meetings of the Korean Pediatric Orthopedic Association and Korean Society for Surgery of the Hand, in 2012. RESULTS: Forty-eight surgeons (87%) used buddy taping to treat finger and toe injuries, especially proximal interphalangeal (PIP) injuries of the hand, finger fractures, toe fractures, metacarpophalangeal injuries of the hand, and PIP injuries of the foot. Sixty-five percent of the surgeons experienced low compliance. Forty-five percent of the surgeons observed skin injuries on the adhesive area of the tape, and skin injuries between the injured finger and healthy finger were observed by 45% of the surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: This study sheds light on the current consensus and complications of buddy taping among physicians. Low compliance and skin injury should be considered when the clinician treats finger and toe injuries by using buddy taping.

Microsurgical free flap and replantation without antithrombotic agents.

Microsurgical reconstructions for free flap transfer, digits and limb replantation have been highly successful applications in the past decades. Antithrombotic prophylactic agents, such as low-molecular-weight dextran, aspirin and heparin have been routinely used for the prevention of microvascular thrombosis. Even though these agents are efficacious in microsurgery, some systemic morbidity is still reported. Forty cases of microsurgical reconstruction over the last five years are reported. They include 22 cases of free flap transfer and 18 cases of replantation (19 fingers, 2 toes and one hand). The surgery was performed by the same group of plastic surgeons and no antithrombotic agent was given intraoperatively or during the post operative period Results show one partial flap loss, two replantation losses due to severe crush injuries of the digits and one toe replantation failure in a two year old. The failure of toe replantation was due to surgical technique and poor post operative immobilization. The result shows that successful microsurgical reconstruction depends on many factors. One of the most important factors is microsurgical technique. Use of antithrombotic agents alone does not appear to play a significant role in the patency of microvascular structures.