Cited by 36Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementWound Healing and TreatmentsTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine

Human amniotic membrane products for patients with diabetic foot ulcers. do they help? a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Open access
Mohammed, Yasmine Adel, Farouk, Hossam Khaled, Gbreel, Mohamed Ibrahim, Ali, Abdelrahman Mahmoud, Salah, Ali Ashraf, Nourelden, Anas Zakarya, Gawad, Mohamed Mahmoud Abd‐El·2022·Journal of Foot and Ankle Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is one of the most serious diabetic complications. DFU is an open wound that usually occurs in the foot sole due to poor blood glucose control, peripheral neuropathy, and poor circulation. The human amniotic allograft membrane is a biological wound dressing derived from the amniotic membrane. It contains amino acids, nutrients, cytokines, and growth factors that make the growth process easier. OBJECTIVE: To compare dehydrated human amnion and chorion allograft (DHACA) plus the standard of wound care (SOC) with the SOC alone. METHODS: We searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science till April 2021 using relevant keywords. All search results were screened for eligibility. We extracted the data from the included trials and pooled them as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) using Review Manager software (ver. 5.4). RESULTS: The pooled effect estimate from 11 RCTs showed that DHACA was superior to SOC regarding the complete wound healing in both 6th and 12th week (RR = 3.78; 95% CI: [2.51, 5.70]; P < 0.00001) and (RR = 2.00; 95% CI: [1.67, 2.39], P < 0.00001 respectively). Also, the analysis favored the DHACA regarding the mean time to heal in the 12th-week (MD = -12.07, 95%CI: [-19.23, -4.91], P = 0.001). The wound size reduction was better with DHACA (MD = 1.18, 95%CI: [-0,10, 2.26], P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Using DHACA with SOC is safer and more effective than using SOC alone for DFU patients.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13047-022-00575-y

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In one randomized clinical trial of 64 participants, Achilles tendon lengthening significantly reduced forefoot plantar pressure compared with presurgical levels (647.2 [SD, 306.7] kPa vs 892.4 [SD, 176.6] kPa; P = .005).

    “One randomized clinical trial of 64 participants showed significantly reduced forefoot plantar pressure compared with presurgical levels (647.2 [SD, 306.7] kPa vs 892.4 [SD, 176.6] kPa; P = .005),”

    From Diabetic Foot Ulcers (2023) · cites this paper as [61]

    The Results > Outcomes and Discussion passages report healing outcomes for amniotic membrane products, not Achilles tendon lengthening or plantar pressure. Searches for Achilles tendon lengthening and the quoted pressure values found no passage addressing the claimed 64-participant trial. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In that trial, Achilles tendon lengthening combined with a total contact cast had a small, nonsignificant effect on healing of foot ulcers compared with a total contact cast alone (relative risk, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.96-1.27).

    “a small, nonsignificant effect on healing of foot ulcers when combined with a total contact cast compared with a total contact cast alone (relative risk, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.96-1.27),”

    From Diabetic Foot Ulcers (2023) · cites this paper as [61]

    The Results (Outcomes; page unavailable) report healing effects for amniotic membrane products plus standard care, not Achilles tendon lengthening plus a total contact cast. A search of our copy for Achilles tendon lengthening and the stated RR and confidence interval found no passage reporting that trial result; the Studies characteristics table mentions a total contact cast only in a different comparison. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In that trial, Achilles tendon lengthening reduced risk of recurrence for patients in diabetic foot ulcer remission (relative risk, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.4-8.2).

    “and reduced risk of recurrence for patients in diabetic foot ulcer remission (relative risk, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.4-8.2). 51,61”

    From Diabetic Foot Ulcers (2023) · cites this paper as [61]

    The Discussion and Results > Outcomes sections evaluate amniotic membrane products for healing active diabetic foot ulcers, not Achilles tendon lengthening in patients whose ulcers are in remission. Searches for Achilles tendon lengthening, recurrence, and the stated risk ratio and confidence interval found no passage addressing the claim; page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [14]O’Connor D, Green S, Higgins PTJ. Cochrane Handbook: General Methods For Cochrane Reviews: Ch 5: Defining the review question and developing criteria for including studies. Cochrane Handb Syst Rev Interv [Internet]. 2011;6(5):81–94.
  2. [25]Lavery LA Fulmer J Shebetka KA Regulski M Vayser D Fried D The efficacy and safety of Grafix ® for the treatment of chronic diabetic foot ulcers: results of a multi-centre, controlled, randomised, blinded, clinical trial Int Wound J 2014 11 5 554 560 10.1111/iwj.12329 25048468 PMC7951030 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mohammed, Y. A., Farouk, H. K., Gbreel, M. I., Ali, A. M., Salah, A. A., Nourelden, A. Z., & Gawad, M. M. A.
Affiliations
  • Assiut University (EG)
  • Fayoum University (EG)
  • October 6 University (EG)
  • Faculty of Medicine Minia University Minia Egypt
  • Al-Azhar University (EG)
  • Faculty of Medicine Al‐Fayoum University Fayoum Egypt
Corresponding author
Mohammed, Yasmine Adel
Venue
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-01
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
71-71
ISSN
1757-1146 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4295898654
Cited by
36
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 6
FWCI
1.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Foot and Ankle Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Assiut University
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Wound Healing and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Keywords
diabetic foot ulcer, wound healing, wound dressings, healing time, wound size reduction, diabetes complications
MeSH terms
Amnion, Diabetes Mellitus, Humans, Wound Healing, Treatment Outcome, Diabetic Foot, Standard of Care

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review