Efficacy of lysine versus mupirocin in the treatment of non-diabetic foot ulcer: the sessing scale for assessment of pressure ulcer
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20205449Keywords:
Sessing scale, Non-diabetic foot ulcer, Lysine, MupirocinAbstract
Background: This present studies intended to evaluate the wound healing ability, efficacy and tolerability of lysine cream (15%) in non- diabetic foot ulcer assessed by way of sessing scale.
Methods: A randomized, open-label, interventional study was directed on 20 subjects (participants) non-diabetic ulcers. Participants were grouped into two groups, control (n=10) and case (n=10). The control was treated with standard treatment with mupirocin and the test group was treated with standard treatment alongside lysine cream (15%) twice every day. Wound healing in the participants was assessed by the sessing scales.
Results: A total of 20 participants were allotted into two groups. The results expressed as mean±standard deviation values imply the size and depth of the foot ulcer from the first week to the 8th week. Both the groups showed a significant increase the ulcer healing and decrease the pressure of foot ulcer of over a period of 8 weeks. Assessment of the first week showed no significant ulcer healing and its pressure. The overall outcome indicated that the lysine-treated group extensively reduced each of the parameters favouring wound healing than the standard therapy with mupirocin (control group).
Conclusions: Results concluded that, lysine cream is better efficacious in the repair of wound and additionally well tolerated compared to mupirocin.
References
Henry G, Garner WL. Inflammatory mediators in wound healing. Surg Clin North Am. 2003;83(3):483-507.
Thorne CH, Beasley RW, Aston SJ, Bartlett SP, Gurtner GC. Grabb & Smith’s Plastic surgery, 6th edition. Chapter 2: Wound healing. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. 2006;322-44.
Australian Wound Management Association. Standards for wound management. Australian Wound Management Association. 2002. Available at: http://www.awma.com.au/ publications/2007/awma_standards.pdf. Accessed on: 25 April 2020.
Breasted JH. The Edwin Smith Surgical papyrus. Chicago: University Chicago press. Oriental Institute Publications (OIP). 1991;1:1930.
Cromack DT, Sporn MB, Roberts AB. Transforming growth factor beta levels in rat wound chambers. J Surg Res. 1987;42:622-8.
Steed DL. The role of growth factors in wound healing. Surg Clin N Am. 1997;77:575-86.
Vilcek J. The cytokine handbook. 3rd edition. San Diego. Academic press. 2003;1998.
Lorenz HP, Longaker MT. Mathes Plastic surgery-6. Trunk and Lower extremity. 2nd edition. Saunder’s Publication. 2003;219.
Gupta RN, Pandey A, Ghosh S. Diabetic foot: Pathogenesis, management and recent advances. Pharma Times. 2000;40:123-45.
Novak TE, Babcock TA, Jho DH, Helton WS, Espat NJ. NF-kappa B inhibition by omega-3 fatty acids modulates LPSstimulated macrophage TNF-alpha transcription. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol. 2003;284:84-9.
Chow O, Barbul A. Immunonutrition: Role in wound healing and tissue regeneration. Critical reviews. Wound healing society. Adv Wound Care. 2012;3:49-53.
Ramsey SD, Newton K, Blough D, McCulloch DK, Sandhu N, Reiber GE, Wagner EH. Incidence, outcomes, and cost of foot ulcers in patients with diabetes. Diabetes Care. 1999;22(3):382-7.
Chow O, Barbul A. Immunonutrition: Role in wound healing and tissue regeneration. Critical reviews. Wound healing society. Adv Wound Care. 2012;3:49-53.
