Clinical outcomes associated with serial sharp debridement of diabetic foot ulcers with and without clostridial collagenase ointment.

Objective: Fifty-five subjects with diabetes mellitus type 1 or 2 and a neuropathic, nonischemic foot ulcer were enrolled into this randomized, controlled, multicenter trial designed to examine the effects of debridement with clostridial collagenase ointment (CCO) used in conjunction with serial sharp debridement for a period of 6 weeks.

Methods: Serial sharp debridement without adjunctive CCO was used in the control group. Various standard care therapies thought to support debridement by endogenous proteases were selected at the discretion of the investigators for use in the control group. The primary outcome measure of this trial was the percent change in ulcer area from baseline at the end of the debridement/treatment period (EOT) and at the end of an additional 6 weeks of follow-up (EOS). Secondary objectives were to assess wound status at EOT and EOS using a standardized wound assessment tool, and to compare the average time to closure for ulcers debrided with serial sharp debridement with and without adjunctive CCO.

Results: Wound area decreased relative to baseline for both the CCO group (-68%, -61%) and the control group (-36%, -46%) at EOT and EOS, respectively. While the inter-group differences did not reach statistical significance, wound area was significantly decreased from baseline at both EOT and EOS for the CCO (P < 0.001) but not for the control group. Wound status scores (scale range 8 to 40) improved for both groups during treatment (CCO: -3.5, control: -3.2) and follow-up (CCO: -5.3, control: -6.4). No differences were observed in the number of sharp debridements (CCO: 3.7, control: 4.0). Median time to closure for wounds that healed was 6 weeks for CCO and 8 weeks for control. On average, ulcers treated with serial sharp debridement plus adjunctive CCO decreased in size more rapidly than ulcers treated without adjunctive CCO debridement. No safety issues were identified based on a review of reported adverse events.

Conclusion: These results suggest there is more to wound debridement than meets the eye, and establish a foundation for larger, confirmatory studies.