International Wound Journal ISSN 1742-4801
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Heel ulcers do heal in patients with diabetes
Hedvig Örneholm1 , Jan Apelqvist2 , Jan Larsson1 & Magnus Eneroth1
1 Department of Orthopaedics, Skåne University Hospital and Lund University, Sweden
2 Department of Endocrinology, Skåne University Hospital and Lund University, Sweden
Key words
Diabetes; Healing; Heel ulcer; Outcome
Örneholm H, Apelqvist J, Larsson J, Eneroth M. Heel ulcers do heal in patients with
diabetes. Int Wound J 2016; doi: 10.1111/iwj.12654
Correspondence to
H. Örneholm
Department of Orthopaedics
Skåne University Hospital
S-20501 Malmö
Lund University
Lund
Sweden
E-mail: hedvig.orneholm@med.lu.se
Abstract
A heel ulcer is considered to be a serious complication in patients with diabetes,
and there is limited information regarding outcome. In most of the literature, a poor
prognosis is described. The aim of this study was to investigate a large cohort of ulcers
located in the heel in patients with diabetes.
Seven hundred and sixty-eight patients [median age 73 (17–98)], presenting with a heel
ulcer at a multidisciplinary diabetes foot clinic, fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were
followed-up until final outcome.
Fifty-eight per cent of the patients healed primarily; 7% healed after major debridement;
9% healed after amputation and 25% died unhealed. Median healing time was 17 weeks.
Ulcer progression was seen in 19% of patients. Thirty-one percent of patients had severe
peripheral vascular disease. A creatinine level below 91 μmol/l was related to a higher
probability for healing without major debridement or amputation, whereas vascular
surgery, nephropathy and oedema were related to a lower probability for healing without
major debridement or amputation.
Two thirds of heel ulcers do heal in patients with diabetes despite patients being elderly
and with extensive comorbidity. The extent of peripheral vascular disease, nephropathy,
oedema and decreased renal function are important factors influencing outcome.
Introduction
A heel ulcer is considered to be a serious complication in
patients with diabetes and is often described with a poor outcome (1). In the literature, there are few studies that specifically
focus on ulcers located on the heel, and many of these report on
small numbers or selected cases, and there is no clear consensus on management (2,3). A common opinion is that a patient
with diabetes and a heel ulcer almost invariably ends up with
an amputation above the ankle. There are also a number of
studies detailing different surgical procedures to enhance healing of a heel ulcer (4–7). To our knowledge, there is only one
other study, published in 2005 by Chipchase and colleagues (8),
reporting on heel ulcers and outcome.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate a large cohort of
consecutively presenting patients with diabetes and an ulcer
located on the heel at a multidisciplinary foot care centre.
Patients and methods
Design
This is a large cohort study of consecutively presenting patients with diabetes and heel ulcers, followed-up
© 2016 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd doi: 10.1111/iwj.12654
prospectively until final outcome (healing or death). All patients
were followed-up according to a preset protocol. Patient data
were gathered prospectively as they visited the diabetic foot
clinic. Analysis of collected data was performed in 2015 by the
first author. Minimum follow-up time was 2 years.
Patient population
All 4273 patients with diabetes who presented with a foot ulcer
at the multidisciplinary diabetes foot clinic (tertiary centre)
from 1 January 1983 to 31 December 2013 were considered
Key Messages:
• heel ulcers do heal in patients with diabetes
• vascular disease of such severity as to have required
vascular surgery, oedema and decreased renal function
were factors negatively influencing outcome
• fifty-eight percent (447/768) of patients healed primarily; 7% (57/768) healed after major debridement;
9% (72/768) healed after major amputation and 25%
(192/768) died unhealed
1
H. Örneholm et al.
Heel ulcers do heal in patients with diabetes
Patients with a foot ulcer admitted to
the diabetic foot care team, 1983-2013
n = 4273
Ulcer of other location
n = 2758
Multiple ulcers
n = 671
Patients with heel ulcer
n = 844
Not fulfilling
inclusion criteria
n=7
Included
n = 837
Drop-out
n = 66
Ongoing treatment
n=3
Available for analysis
n = 768
Healing without amputation
n = 504
Without
major debridement
n = 447
Deceased unhealed
n = 192
Healing after
major amputation
n = 72
With
major debridement
n = 57
Figure 1 Outcome of heel ulcers in patients with diabetes. n = number of patients.
for inclusion (Figure 1). Inclusion criteria for this study were
diabetes and an ulcer located on the heel. If a patient presented
with bilateral heel ulcers, the ulcer with the worst outcome was
included. Patients with multiple ulcers were not included.
During the observation period, 844 patients were originally
classified as fulfilling the inclusion criteria (Figure 1). Seven
patients were excluded from the analysis after re-evaluation of
the data. Sixty-six patients were lost to follow-up, and three
patients had ongoing treatment at last follow-up in this study
(30 June 2015).
Thus, a total of 768 patients (432 males, 336 females) with
a median age of 73 (17–98) years remained for analysis in this
study. The median duration of diabetes was 17 (0–72), years
and 56% of the patients were male (Table 1).
Hypertension was present in 67% of patients, and 39% of
patients had ischaemic heart disease. Thirty-five percent of
patients had evidence of nephropathy, and 12% had end-stage
renal disease. Seventy-four percent of patients lived in their own
home, and 52% did not have any home assistance (Table 1). In
87% of patients, good concordance was noted.
Eleven percent of patients had had an amputation prior to
entering the study, either a minor amputation on the same side
or an amputation at any level on the contralateral side. Vascular
surgery had been performed in 6% of patients prior to entering
the study and was performed in 23% of patients during the
2
course of the study. Of the 46 patients who had vascular surgery
prior to enrolment, 15 (33%) patients had endovascular surgery,
and 31 (67%) patients had open vascular reconstruction. Of
the 176 patients who had vascular surgery during the course of
the study, 48 (27%) patients had endovascular surgery, and 128
(73%) had open vascular reconstruction. At enrolment, 38% of
patients had a history of a previously healed ulcer on either foot
(Table 1).
Setting/organisation
The diabetic foot centre is located at a university hospital with a
primary care catchment area of approximately 700 000 people
at the end of the study. This centre is the single provider of specialised diabetic foot care in this area, from the year 2000, operating in two geographic locations, and is also a tertiary referral
centre for the surrounding regions. The management protocol at
the diabetic foot clinic is based on a multidisciplinary approach
and has been previously described (9–13). Briefly, it consists
of inpatient and outpatient visits, regular podiatric care, individually adjusted footwear, regular ulcer dressings and access
to specialists in vascular surgery, orthopaedics and infectious
diseases when needed. When presenting with a foot ulcer, the
patients were seen by the multidisciplinary foot care team, consisting of a diabetologist, an orthopaedic surgeon, a diabetes
© 2016 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
H. Örneholm et al.
Heel ulcers do heal in patients with diabetes
Table 1 Patient characteristics at inclusion and outcome. Values are n (%) or median (range)
All patients
Primary
healing
Healing after
major
debridement,
no amputation
Healing after
amputation
Deceased
unhealed
Primary healing
versus all
others P value
768
73 (17–98)
432 (56)
17 (0–72)
520 (68)
126 (16)
515 (67)
272 (35)
268 (35)
95 (12)
91 (29–1101)
296 (39)
278 (36)
223 (29)
223 (29)
123 (69–185)
7⋅5 (3⋅4–14⋅9)
571 (74)
397 (52)
86 (11)
46 (6)
176 (23)
447 (58)
71 (19–96)
244 (55)
15 (0–70)
301 (67)
75 (17)
292 (65)
156 (35)
142 (32)
49 (11)
88 (29–978)
159 (36)
142 (32)
110 (25)
111 (25)
126 (70–169)
7⋅5 (4.6–14⋅2)
360 (81)
263 (59)
39 (9)
20 (5)
82 (18)
57 (7)
65 (17–88)
32 (56)
12 (0–55)
39 (68)
9
32 (56)
28 (49)
17 (30)
5
80 (45–808)
15 (26)
11 (19)
16 (28)
16 (28)
129 (74–161)
8⋅4 (4⋅8–14⋅9)
43 (75)
35 (61)
4
5
14 (25)
72 (9)
70 (49–89)
47 (65)
22 (1–72)
51 (71)
16 (22)
54 (75)
33 (46)
40 (56)
16 (22)
121 (37–1101)
33 (46)
29 (40)
28 (39)
24 (33)
111 (69–163)
7⋅6 (4⋅1–12⋅1)
57 (79)
34 (47)
14 (19)
8
39 (54)
192 (25)
79 (40–98)
109 (57)
20 (0–56)
129 (67)
26 (14)
137 (71)
55 (29)
69 (36)
25 (13)
101 (30–632)
89 (46)
96 (50)
69 (36)
72 (38)
120 (84–185)
6⋅9 (3⋅4–14⋅9)
111 (58)
65 (34)
29 (15)
13 (7)
41 (21)
<0⋅0001
ns
ns
ns
ns
ns
0⋅07
0⋅03
ns
0⋅03
0⋅05
0⋅003
0⋅001
0⋅002
<0⋅0001
ns
<0⋅0001
<0⋅0001
0⋅01
0⋅04
0⋅0004
specialist nurse, an orthotist and a chiropodist. The team works
in close cooperation with vascular surgeons and also has access
to specialists in infectious diseases. The patients were treated
by the team both as in- and outpatients and followed-up by the
team until final outcome (healing with or without amputation
or deceased unhealed).
Definitions
Number of patients
Age
Male gender
Duration of diabetes (years)*
Diabetes treatment with insulin
Current smoker
Hypertension
Retinopathy†(preprolif + prolif)
Nephropathy
End-stage renal disease
Creatinine level‡(μmol/l)
Ischaemic heart disease
Congestive heart failure
Non-ischaemic heart disease
Cerebrovascular lesion
Haemoglobin level§(g/l)
HbA1c at hospital admission¶(%)
Living in own home
No home care
Previous amputation
Vascular surgery prior to inclusion
Vascular surgery after inclusion||
*Duration of diabetes not known for 133 patients.
†No retinal examination performed in 209 patients.
‡No creatinine level recorded for 180 patients.
§No haemoglobin level recorded for 206 patients.
¶No HbA1c recorded for 207 patients.
||No record of vascular surgery for 30 patients.
Clinical examination
At inclusion, all patients were questioned for medical history
and examined, and the findings were recorded according to a
preset protocol (12,14). The lesions were classified according
to the Wagner classification (15).
Measurements
Systolic toe and ankle blood pressure measurements were
obtained using strain gauge and Doppler techniques as previously described (14). In cases where the patient was found to
have decreased peripheral blood circulation, the patient was
referred to a vascular surgeon for evaluation and, if possible,
treatment with vascular surgery.
In 274 patients, ankle or toe pressure measurements were not
obtained (because of previous amputation, calcified arteries or
the patients’ medical condition) or were considered unnecessary (because of palpable foot pulses).
© 2016 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
General characteristics
Duration of diabetes was calculated from the year of diagnosis until presentation with an ulcer at the foot clinic.
Nephropathy was defined as persistent urine albumin > 300
mg/l (13). End-stage renal disease (ESRD) was defined as
uremia (creatinine level > 300 μmol/l), treatment in dialysis
or a previous renal transplantation. Patients were defined as
smokers when currently smoking or having stopped smoking
for less than one year. Hypertension was defined as blood
pressure over 140/90 mm Hg or treatment with antihypertensive agents. Retinopathy was classified as pre-proliferative
or proliferative based on retinal photographs by an
ophthalmologist.
Cardiovascular comorbidity was divided into ischaemic
heart disease (angina pectoris or myocardial infarction),
non-ischaemic heart disease (e.g. atrial fibrillation or
valvular heart disease), or congestive heart failure (13).
Cerebrovascular comorbidity was defined as previously
described (13).
Assisted living was defined as any institutional living outside
the patients’ own home. Home care was defined as any assistance the patient had in his or her own home. Good concordance
was defined as the ability to keep 50% or more of appointments
with the multidisciplinary foot care team (13).
3
H. Örneholm et al.
Heel ulcers do heal in patients with diabetes
Extremity-related characteristics
Severe peripheral vascular disease (SPVD) was defined as toe
pressure less than 45 mmHg or ankle pressure less than 80
mmHg. For classification of peripheral vascular disease, the
lowest distal blood pressure measurement was used. Pain was
defined as rest pain localised to the foot. Oedema was defined
as swelling of the foot enough to leave a finger imprint. Previous amputation and previous vascular surgery were defined as
having been performed on either side before the patient entered
the study.
Ulcer-related characteristics
An ulcer was defined as a full thickness lesion through all
the layers of the skin and classified according to Wagner (15).
Superficial skin infection or cellulitis was not reported separately in the protocol (Wagner classification). An increase in
Wagner grade from time of inclusion during time of treatment
was recorded.
Ulcer duration was defined as number of weeks from onset
of ulcer until arrival at the foot clinic. When time of onset
could not be established, ulcer duration was categorised as
unknown. Healing was defined as macroscopically complete
epithelialisation and had to be reconfirmed after 6 months (10).
If the ulcer reoccurred during the first 6 months, it was per
definition not healed. Healing time was defined as number of
weeks from arrival at the foot clinic until healing. After healing
is reconfirmed after 6 months, patients are not followed-up
at the diabetic foot centre. Patients are recommended regular
visits to a podiatrist and regular check-ups at their primary care
facility. If a new ulcer develops, patients are referred to the
outpatient clinic and treated accordingly.
Minor debridement was defined as such the removal of
callosities and debris that could be performed in the outpatient
clinic without anaesthesia. Major debridement was defined
as surgical revision or resection of soft tissues and/or bone,
requiring anaesthesia and/or the use of an operation theatre (1).
Primary healing was defined as healing with intact skin
without amputation and was subdivided into healing with or
without major debridement.
Off-loading
Upon arrival at the foot clinic with an ulcer located on the heel,
the patients were immediately prescribed total pressure relief,
both prescribed for walking, sitting and bedridden patients.
Type of off-loading was adapted to the patients’ individual need
and medical condition and was modified as required during the
course of treatment.
with the specialists concerned (1,9–12). The strategy for management in cases of diabetic foot infections is suggested by a
programme written in close cooperation with the department
of infectious diseases, including diagnosis, investigations,
cultures, microbiology and antimicrobial treatment.
When clinical signs of infection were present, oral antibiotics were given. Patients with deep abscess or osteomyelitis
were hospitalised, and intravenous antibiotics were administered (16). Analgesia was used related to cause and intensity
of pain.
Hospitalisation was used in case of the need for acute surgical
treatment, parenteral antibiotics or when there was a deterioration of infection despite non-operative treatment. The treatment
chosen in each case was based on written guidelines at our
institution (in cooperation with the department of infectious
diseases), including antibiotic treatment, and changed when
decided necessary by the responsible physician (16).
Topical treatment was prescribed by the multidisciplinary
foot care team according to the individual wound bed condition.
Dressing changes were supervised by a registered nurse in
primary health care and/or home nursing services. Telephone
support during daytime was provided by the team.
Surgical treatment
Minor debridement was performed as required at the outpatient clinic by a chiropodist. Major debridement and amputation
were performed at the discretion of, and by, an orthopaedic
surgeon. A non-healing ulcer was not per se considered an indication for amputation (11). Dry and inactive necrosis with or
without an underlying osteomyelitis were left for mummification as long as pain and infection would allow. Acute incision
and drainage was performed in case of a deep abscess (16). Vascular surgery (including endovascular and open methods) was
performed at the discretion of, and by, a vascular surgeon. Major
amputation was defined as an amputation proximal to the ankle
joint.
Statistics
Values are given as numbers or median (range) unless otherwise
stated. Statistical analysis (chi2 ) was performed for those who
healed without major debridement or amputation versus those
who healed after major debridement or amputation or were
unhealed at death.
A stepwise multiple logistic regression model with backward selection, including variables with P < 0⋅1, was performed
to determine factors related to outcome. All statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 21 (SPSS,
Chicago, IL).
Ethical approval
Non-surgical treatment
Treatment was carried out in close cooperation with primary
care and home care. Individually adjusted off-loading equipment (total contact cast, individually fitted shoes and/or insoles,
orthosis) was offered to all patients.
Infection, metabolic control, peripheral arterial disease,
oedema and comorbidity were managed in close cooperation
4
The Regional Ethical Review Board approved the study.
Results
The median ulcer duration at inclusion was 4 (0⋅5–166) weeks
(Table 2). There was no correlation between ulcer duration and
outcome (data not shown).
© 2016 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
H. Örneholm et al.
Heel ulcers do heal in patients with diabetes
Table 2 Local characteristics at inclusion and outcome. Values are n (%) or median (range).
Number of patients
Foot oedema
Ulcer duration at inclusion*
(weeks)
Wagner grade at inclusion
Precipitating factors
1 (superficial ulcer)
2 (deep ulcer)
3 (abscess and/or
osteomyelitis)
4 (gangrene of portion of
foot)
5 (gangrene of greater part
of foot)
Intrinsic ulcer
Pressure ulcer
Cracked skin
Miscellaneous
Severe peripheral vascular
disease (toe pressure < 45 or
ankle pressure < 80 mm Hg)
No severe peripheral vascular
disease (toe pressure < 45 or
ankle pressure < 80 mm Hg)
No distal pressure
measurement
Toe pressure (mm Hg)
Ankle pressure (mm Hg)
Local foot pain
Healing
after
amputation
Deceased
unhealed
Primary
healing
versus all
others
P value
<0⋅0001
0⋅04
All
patients
Primary
healing
Healing after
major
debridement,
no amputation
768
284 (37)
4 (0⋅5–166)
447 (58)
130 (29)
4 (0⋅5–166)
57 (7)
21 (37)
5 (0⋅5–41)
72 (9)
43 (60)
4 (0⋅5–157)
192 (25)
90 (47)
4 (0⋅5–53)
653 (85)
82 (11)
18 (2)
415 (64)
26 (32)
4
38 (6)
11 (13)
8
50 (8)
15 (18)
2
150 (23)
30 (37)
4
8
2
0
1
5
7
0
0
4
3
90 (12)
331 (43)
96 (13)
251 (33)
237 (31)
62 (69)
146 (44)
76 (79)
163 (65)
118 (26)
9
18 (5)
5
25 (10)
11 (19)
7
31 (9)
4
30 (12)
33 (46)
12 (13)
136 (41)
11 (11)
33 (13)
75 (39)
257 (33)
168 (38)
35 (61)
17 (24)
37 (19)
274 (36)
161 (36)
11 (19)
22 (31)
80 (42)
53 (5–224) 60 (10–224)
95 (10–290) 104 (23–290)
185 (24)
86 (19)
70 (15–210)
128 (45–225)
9
40 (10–140) 39 (5–135)
73 (10–214) 65 (15–220)
24 (33)
66 (34)
0.002
<0⋅0001
0⋅001
<0⋅0001
*Ulcer duration is not known for 111 patients.
Superficial ulcers (Wagner grade 1) were the most commonly
presenting ulcers (85% of ulcers), and a pressure ulcer was the
most common precipitating factor (43% of ulcers; Table 2).
In patients with a pressure ulcer as the precipitating factor,
the primary healing rate was 44% (146/331). In patients with
cracked skin, intrinsic ulcer or miscellaneous cause as the
precipitating factor, the primary healing rate was 79% (76/96),
69% (62/90) and 65% (163/251), respectively. Patients with a
pressure ulcer had a higher mortality rate (41%) than patients
with other precipitating factors (P < 0⋅0001).
For the 33 patients (4% of all included patients) in our
study who had an ulcer classified as Wagner grade 3 or higher
upon arrival at the foot clinic, six healed without surgery or
amputation; eight healed after major debridement; seven healed
after major amputation; and 12 were unhealed at death.
SPVD was present in 31% of patients. Foot oedema was
present in 284 patients (37%), and 185 patients (24%) had
presence of pain. Progress of Wagner grade was seen in 19%
of patients.
Outcome
Sixty-six per cent of patients (504/768) achieved healing without (n = 447) or with (n = 57) major debridement; 9% (72/768)
healed after an amputation and 25% (192/768) died unhealed
© 2016 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Table 3 Outcome according to period at inclusion. Values are n (%)
Outcome
Healing (without major
debridement or
amputation)
Healing (with major
debridement, no
amputation)
Healing after amputation
Deceased unhealed
1983–2000
2001–2013
P value
120 (54)
327 (60)
ns
39 (18)
18 (3)
0⋅001
18 (8)
45 (20)
54 (10)
147 (27)
ns
0⋅05
(Figure 1). Of the 57 patients who healed after major debridement, four patients had a resection, and another four patients
had a skin transplant. Primary healing in surviving patients was
78% (447/576). Patients included after the year 2000 had a
lower healing rate with major debridement and a higher frequency of patients who died unhealed (Table 3).
Median healing time from inclusion was 17 (1–416) weeks.
Healing time for those who healed following major debridement (28 weeks) or amputation (24 weeks) was longer than
for those who had neither major debridement nor amputation
(14 weeks, P < 0⋅0001). No correlation could be found between
ulcer duration and healing time (data not shown).
5
H. Örneholm et al.
Heel ulcers do heal in patients with diabetes
Table 4 Stepwise multiple regression analysis with backward selection
of factors related to outcome between patients who healed without
surgical intervention and patients who healed after major debridement
or amputation
Odds ratio (95% CI)
P value
3⋅8 (1⋅9–7⋅2)
2⋅5 (1⋅3–4⋅9)
2⋅4 (1⋅3–4⋅4)
2⋅1 (1⋅1–4⋅2)
<0⋅0001
0⋅007
0⋅007
0⋅03
No vascular surgery
No nephropathy
No oedema
Creatinine < 91 μmol/l
Factors related to outcome
A number of patient and local characteristics were found to
be related to outcome when bivariate analysis (chi2) was performed (Tables 1 and 2). When a stepwise multiple regression
analysis with backward selection was performed, vascular
surgery (P < 0⋅0001), nephropathy (P = 0⋅007) and oedema
(P = 0⋅007) were factors related to a lower probability for healing without major debridement or amputation, and a creatinine
level below 91 μmol/l (P = 0⋅03) was found to be related to a
higher probability for healing without major debridement or
amputation (Table 4).
Discussion
This is, to our knowledge, the largest study to date on a cohort
of patients with diabetes and an ulcer located on the heel and
followed-up until final outcome. An ulcer located on the heel
in patients with diabetes is a serious complication. In a larger
cohort of foot ulcers, regardless of ulcer location, heel ulcers
made up 10% of all foot ulcers (17). In our study, ulcers located
on the heel in patients with diabetes make up 20% of foot ulcers.
Most studies regarding ulcers located on the heel in patients
with diabetes have small numbers or a selected category of
patients (1–8,18,19).
In this study of 768 consecutively presenting diabetes
patients with a heel ulcer, 66% healed without an amputation;
9% healed after an amputation, and 25% died unhealed. In surviving patients, 78% healed without an amputation. Reported
healing rates of heel ulcers in patients with diabetes vary
between 51% and 95%, including between 12 and 100 patients
(5,6,8,19). In agreement with Chipchase et al. (8), our results
contradict the prevailing belief that most heel ulcers will require
an amputation above the ankle joint. Such a belief might well
act as a self-fulfilling prophecy and thereby maintain itself. A
team approach to this group of patients, early referral to a centre
with expertise in caring for diabetic foot ulcers and adequate
pressure relief are key elements in our treatment strategy and
might have played a role in the favourable outcome. The price
to pay is often a long healing time.
In a previously published work on plantar forefoot ulcers
in patients with diabetes (20), the overall healing rate without amputation was 79%. We consider a healing rate without
amputation of 66% in patients with heel ulcer a good outcome,
especially as these patients are older and often have more extensive comorbidity than those with plantar forefoot ulcers.
In this study, the ulcer duration was relatively short, with
a median of 4 weeks at inclusion. Eighty-five percent of heel
6
ulcers were superficial upon arrival at the foot clinic. In most of
the published data on ulcers located on the heel, the ulcers are
deeper at inclusion (4–7,19,21). This indicates that our patients
are referred to the multidisciplinary centre at an early stage
in ulcer management. This early referral to a multidisciplinary
centre, before the ulcer has progressed to exposed bone, and
total off-loading may be important regarding outcome.
In the present study, 25% of the patients died unhealed. This
is higher in comparison to most other studies where mortality
ranges between 5% and 21% (4–8,18,19,21). The patients in
our study had a higher age and extensive comorbidity. There
was also no set time limit to follow-up, but all patients were
followed-up to final outcome. The mortality rate in patients with
a pressure heel ulcer (43%, 331/768 patients) was considerably
higher than in patients with other precipitating factors. This
could be because of these patients having more comorbidities.
The findings in our study indicate that ulcers located on the heel
in patients with diabetes overall do not have a poor outcome.
However, pressure ulcers may be considered a separate entity
with a potentially poorer prognosis.
For 111 patients, ulcer duration could not be established.
Among these patients, 52% (58/111) healed without major
debridement;6% (7/111) healed after major debridement; 13%
(14/111) healed after major amputation and 29% (32/111) died
unhealed. Two previous studies have indicated a relationship
between ulcer duration and outcome (22,23). In this study, we
could not find any correlation between duration of ulcer and
outcome or healing time, consistent with the findings in another
study (20).
The median healing time in our study was 17 weeks. A
longer healing time was seen for patients who had an amputation or major debridement than for those who healed primarily. In studies where healing time is reported, the healing
time was between 10–33 weeks (4,5,8,19,21,24). Comparing
healing times between studies is not easy as there are no clear
definitions, and healing is not always defined. In this study, all
patients are followed-up to final outcome, and unlike in many
other studies, there is no set time limit to follow-up. Another
important difference from most other studies is that time to heal
is registered from the date of arrival at the foot clinic, not from
the date of surgery.
In the literature, there are some studies that look at factors
related to outcome. Treiman and colleagues (18) found that normal renal function, a palpable foot pulse, functioning posterior
tibial artery and the number of functioning tibial arteries predicted the healing of heel ulcers. Bakheit and colleagues (19)
found that short duration of diabetes, adequate circulation and
a superficial wound were factors associated with healing, while
Chipchase and colleagues (8) found that a larger ulcer and presence of peripheral arterial disease predicted a worse outcome.
In a large mixed cohort study of diabetic foot ulcers comorbidity, severe PAD, infection and extent of tissue involvement were
factors associated with outcome (1,25).
Multivariate analysis in the present study showed that vascular surgery, nephropathy and oedema were the most important factors related to poor outcome, whereas a creatinine level
below 91 μmol/l was the only factor related to a higher probability for healing without major debridement or amputation.
© 2016 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
H. Örneholm et al.
This is a study of a large, well defined patient material in
which all patients are followed according to a standardised
protocol. All patients are followed-up to final outcome, both
as inpatients and outpatients, by the multidisciplinary foot
care team. There are, however, some potential weaknesses to
consider in interpreting the data.
In this study, we included patients with an ulcer located on
the heel. Patients classified as having multiple ulcers were not
included. Among the patients admitted to our centre, 671 were
classified as having multiple ulcers. In this group of patients,
there could be a number of heel ulcers as well. Discerning which
of these patients had a heel ulcer as well is not possible.
Analysis of patients with multiple ulcers admitted to our
centre showed that these patients had a higher mortality rate
(33%) and a lower primary healing rate (21%) than patients
with ulcers located on the heel. One possible reason for this
is that patients with multiple ulcers have more severe disease
and comorbidity (12).
This cohort spans over three decades, and undoubtedly, there
have been changes and evolvement in treatment over the years.
When analysing the data according to time period, patients
included after the year 2000 had a lower healing rate after
major debridement and a higher frequency of patients who died
unhealed. The reason for this is not known. When following-up
patients over a longer period of time, it is inevitable that there
will be changes in daily practice, which has to be taken into
consideration when evaluating cohorts over time.
Ulcers in this study were classified according to Wagner.
This classification has a weakness; it does not describe ulcer
area or extent of infection. Unfortunately, it is not possible to
reclassify the ulcers to more recent systems retrospectively as
the older records lack information on, for example, ulcer size
and classification of infection.
Major conclusions
The most important finding in our study is that ulcers located
on the heel in patients with diabetes have a high probability for
healing. Evidence of vascular disease of such severity as to have
required vascular surgery, oedema and decreased renal function
were factors negatively influencing the outcome.
Heel ulcers do heal in patients with diabetes
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
References
1. International Consensus on the Diabetic Foot and Guidance on the
Management and Prevention of the Diabetic Foot. International
Working Group on the Diabetic Foot 2015. The Hague, URL
www.iwgdf.org. [accessed on 1 September 2015].
2. Cevera J, Bolton L, Kerstein M. Options for diabetic patients with
chronic heel ulcers. J Diabetes Complications 1997;11:358–66.
3. Younes N, Albsoul A, Awad H. Diabetic heel ulcers: a major risk
factor for lower extremity amputation. Ostomy Wound Manage
2004;50:50–60.
4. Van Riet A, Harake R, Stuyck J. Partial calcanectomy: a procedure to
cherish or reject? Foot Ankle Surg 2012;18:25–9.
5. Goudie E, Gendics C, Lantis J. Multimodal therapy as an algoritm to
limb salvage in diabetic patients with large heel ulcers. Int Wound J
2012;9:132–8.
6. Baravarian B, Menendez M, Weinheimer D, Lowery C, Kosanovich R,
Vidt L. Subtotal calcanectomy for the treatment of large heel ulceration
© 2016 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd
22.
23.
24.
25.
and calcaneal osteomyelitis in the diabetic patient. J Foot Ankle Surg
1999;38:194–202.
Fraccalvieri M, Pristera G, Zingarelli E, Ruka E, Bruschi S. Treatment
of chronic heel osteomyelitis in vasculopathic patients. Can the combined use of Integra®, skin graft and negative pressure wound therapy
be considered a valid therapeutic approach after partial tangential calcanectomy? Int Wound J 2012;9:214–20.
Chipchase A, Treece K, Pound N, Game F, Jeffcoate W. Heel ulcers
don’t heal in diabetes. Or do they? Diabet Med 2005;22:1258–62.
Apelqvist J, Ragnarson-Tennvall G, Persson U, Larsson J. Diabetic foot ulcers in a multidisciplinary setting. An economic analysis of primary healing and healing with amputation. J Intern Med
1994;235:463–71.
Larsson J, Agardh C-D, Apelqvist J, Stenström A. Local signs and
symptoms in relation to final amputation level in diabetic patients. Acta
Orthop Scand 1994;65:387–93.
Larsson J, Agardh C-D, Apelqvist J, Stenström A. Long term prognosis
after healed amputation in patients with diabetes. Clin Orthop Relat
Res 1998;350:149–58.
Gershater MA, Löndahl M, Nyberg P, Larsson J, Thörne J, Eneroth M,
Apelqvist J. Complexity of factors related to outcome of neuropathic
and neuroischaemic/ischaemic diabetic foot ulcers: a cohort study.
Diabetologia 2009;52:398–407.
Apelqvist J, Agardh C-D. The association between clinical risk factors and outcome of diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Res Clin Pract
1992;18:43–53.
Apelqvist J, Castenfors J, Larsson J, Stenström A, Agardh C. Prognostic value of systolic ankle and toe pressure levels in outcome of diabetic
foot ulcer. Diabetes Care 1989;12:373–8.
Wagner FW Jr. The dysvascular foot: a system for diagnosis and
treatment. Foot Ankle 1981;2:64–122.
Eneroth M, Larsson J, Apelqvist J. Deep foot infections in patients
with diabetes and foot ulcer: an entity with different characteristics, treatments and prognosis. J Diabetes Complications 1999;
13:254–63.
Prompers L, Huijberts M, Apelqvist J, Jude E, Piaggesi A, Bakker K,
et al. High prevalence of ischemia, infection and serious comorbidity
in patient with diabetic foot disease in Europe. Baseline results from
the Eurodiale study. Diabetologia 2007;50:18–25.
Treiman G, Oderich G, Ashrafi A, Schneider P. Management of
ischemic heel ulceration and gangrene: an evaluation of factors associated with successful healing. J Vasc Surg 2000;31:1110–8.
Bakheit H, Mohamed M, Mahadi S, Widatalla A, Shawer M, Khamis
A, Ahmed M. Diabetic heel ulcer in the Sudan: determinants and
outcome. J Foot Ankle Surg 2012;51:152–5.
Örneholm H, Apelqvist J, Larsson J, Eneroth M. High probability of
healing without amputation of plantar forefoot ulcers in patients with
diabetes. Wound Repair Regen 2015;23:922–31.
Pickwell K, Siersma V, Kars M, Holstein P, Schaper N. Diabetic foot
disease: impact of ulcer location on ulcer healing. Diabetes Metab Res
Rev 2013;29:377–83.
Margolis DJ, Kantor J, Santanna J, Strom BL, Berlin JA. Risk factors
for delayed healing of neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers: a pooled
analysis. Arch Dermatol 2000;136:1531–5.
Beckert S, Witte M, Wicke C, Königsrainer A, Coerper S. A new
wound-based severity score for diabetic foot ulcers: a prospective
analysis of 1,000 patients. Diabetes Care 2006;29:988–92.
Oyibo SO, Jude EB, Tarawneh I, Nguyen HC, Armstrong DG, Harkless LB, Boulton AJ. The effects of ulcer size and site, patient’s age,
sex and type and duration of diabetes on the outcome of diabetic foot
ulcers. Diabet Med 2001;18:133–8.
Prompers L, Schaper N, Apelqvist J, Edmonds M, Jude E, Mauricio D, et al. Prediction of outcome in individuals with diabetic foot
ulcer: focus on the differences between individuals with and without peripheral arterial disease. The EURODIALE Study. Diabetologia
2008;51:747–5.
7