Diabetes-related foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is a common yet complex condition, often complicated by concurrent soft tissue infections (STIs). This study evaluates the efficacy of a two-step conservative surgical approach, hypothesizing that it offers comparable outcomes to a one-step procedure. Conducted on a cohort of 93 patients with DFO, the study categorized cases into two types: OM1 (osteomyelitis without STI) and OM2 (osteomyelitis with STI). OM2 was further subdivided into OM2a (early diagnosis) and OM2b (late diagnosis), with OM2 patients undergoing initial soft tissue debridement followed by elective bone surgery. The results indicated no significant differences in infection recurrence or amputation rates between the two surgical approaches, with recurrence observed in 20.7% of cases and amputations in 10.8%. The two-step procedure was associated with higher inflammatory responses and greater need for antibiotics and hospital admissions. However, these factors did not translate into increased recurrence or amputation compared to the one-step procedure. The study supports the two-step approach as a safe and effective method for managing complicated DFO cases, providing a viable alternative to immediate amputation or single-stage surgery. Despite some limitations, including regional specificity and potential underdiagnosis in late-diagnosed cases, the findings offer valuable insights for clinical management and suggest further research to refine treatment protocols. The study\'s strengths include confirmed histopathological diagnoses and consistent follow-up, reinforcing the validity of the two-step surgical approach for complex DFO treatment.

18F-FDG-PET/CT is indicated in the workup of patients with suspected infective endocarditis to detect intra-cardiac and disseminated infections, as well as its source. We present the case of a 66-year-old female patient known for recurrent diabetic foot infection, with equivocal TTE results and persistent MRSA bacteremia despite medical management. PET/CT revealed evidence of left foot osteomyelitis. Whole body PET/CT diagnosed native mitral valve infective endocarditis (IE) and right lower lobe segmental pulmonary artery uptake, consistent with septic pulmonary embolism (PE).

The aim of the current study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO), comparing subjects with and without peripheral arterial disease (PAD). The study is a prospective study including a population of patients affected by a DFO located in the forefoot. All patients were managed by a surgical conservative approach defined by the removal of the infected bone, in association with the antibiotic therapy. Patients were divided into two groups: those with PAD (neuro-ischaemic DFO) and those without (neuropathic DFO). After 1 year of follow-up, the following outcome were evaluated and compared between groups: healing, healing time, minor amputation, major amputation, hospitalization, need for surgical re-intervention. Overall, 166 patients were included, 87(52.4%) of them had neuro-ischaemic DFO and 79 (47.6%) neuropathic DFO. Patients with neuro-ischaemic DFO in comparison to neuropathic DFO were older (72.5 ± 9 vs 64.1 ± 15.5 years, P < .0001), had longer diabetes duration (21.8 ± 5.6 vs 16.4 ± 7.6 years, P < .0001), higher rate of dialysis (13.8 vs 1.3%, P = .001) and ischaemic heart disease (79.3 vs 12.7%, P < .0001). Outcomes for neuro-ischaemic DFO and neuropathic DFO were: healing (96.5 vs 97.5%, P = .7), healing time (7.8 ± 6.2 vs 5.7 ± 3.7 weeks, P = .01), minor amputation (16.1 vs 3.8%, P = .006), major amputation (0 vs 0%, ns), hospitalization (90.8 vs 51.9%, P < .0001), surgical re-intervention (14.9 vs 8.8%, P = .004) respectively. In addition, PAD resulted in an independent predictor of minor amputation, hospitalization, and surgical re-intervention. DFO in patients with PAD was characterized by longer healing time, more cases of minor amputation, hospitalization, and surgical re-intervention. PAD independently predicted the risk of minor amputation, hospitalization, and surgical re-intervention, while it was not associated with the healing rate.

Background: Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is a major complication and can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Systemic antibiotic therapy is often initiated first line to achieve quiescence of infection. To perform a multi-centre case review of systemic antibiotic intervention to treat adults with DFO in England and Wales and compare with national guidelines \'Diabetic foot problems: prevention and management\'. Methods: Eight centres from England and Wales retrospectively collated data from a minimum of five adults (aged ≥ 18 years) from electronic case records. All patients were treated with systemic antibiotics following a new diagnosis of DFO (1 June 2021-31 December 2021). Results: 40 patients (35 males and 5 females) were included; the mean age was 62.3 years (standard deviation (SD) 13.0). Patients commenced systemic oral 14 (35%) or intravenous 26 (65%) antibiotic therapy following a new diagnosis of DFO. Twenty-seven (67.5%) patients were medically or surgically managed in the 12-week period with clinical quiescence of infection. Twenty-one patients (52.5%) had no recurrence of DFO infection within 12 weeks; seventeen (42.5%) of these patients had clinical quiescence of infection with systemic antibiotics alone without surgical intervention and nine (22.5%) of these cases had no recurrence of DFO. There were no cases of major amputation or death. All centres showed significant in-centre variability in systemic antibiotic management; variability was reported in the clinical and quantity indicators specifically to antibiotic selection, single versus dual therapy, mode of delivery and duration of treatment. Conclusions: This case review identifies there is existing variation when treating adults with systemic antibiotics for DFO. Further national guidance is required to standardise service delivery and care to improve patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are a challenging complication of diabetes mellitus, often leading to poor clinical outcomes and significant socioeconomic burdens. We evaluated the effectiveness of a definitive single-stage protocolized surgical management pathway, including the use of local antibiotic bone graft substitute, for the treatment of infected DFUs with associated osteomyelitis.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Medical records were extracted (from January 2017 to December 2020) to establish a database consisting of patients who underwent surgical intervention for the treatment of an infected DFU with osteomyelitis. Patients were divided into conventional (control) and protocolized (intervention) surgical groups depending on the treatment received. Clinical outcomes were assessed over a 12-month follow-up period.
RESULTS: A total of 136 consecutive patients were included (conventional = 33, protocolized = 103). The protocolized group demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in the mean number of operations performed per patient (1.2 vs. 3.5) (P < 0.001) and a shorter accumulative hospital length of stay (12.6 vs. 25.1 days) (P < 0.001) compared to the conventional group. Major amputation rates were significantly lower in the protocolized group (2% vs. 18%) (P < 0.001). Within 12 months of surgical intervention, the protocolized group exhibited an ulcer healing rate of 89%, with a low rate of recurrence (3%).
CONCLUSIONS: The protocolized surgical pathway, including local antibiotic bone graft substitute use, demonstrated superior outcomes compared to conventional management for the treatment of infected DFUs with osteomyelitis. Further research is needed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and generalizability of this approach.

Background: This study aims to assess the atherogenic index of plasma (AIP) diagnostic value in detecting diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) among patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted on 80 patients with DFUs and suspected DFO between January 2022 and December 2023. The primary outcome measures included the diagnosis of DFO, determined by positive microbiological analysis results from bone samples and its correlation with the AIP. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were utilized to select the optimal diagnostic cut-off points for AIP and post hoc analysis was performed to evaluate the difference in the AIP for diagnosing DFO in patients with and without peripheral arterial disease (PAD). Results: The diagnostic potential for DFO in PAD patients of AIP-1 (Log TC/HDL) showed an AUC of 0.914 (p < 0.001 [0.832-0.996]), leading to a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 85%. By contrast, AIP-2 (Log TG/HDL) demonstrated a slightly lower AUC of 0.841 (p < 0.001 [0.716-0.967]), leading to a sensitivity of 76% and a specificity of 74%. Conclusions: The AIP tool, with its ideal blend of sensitivity and specificity, aids in predicting DFO effectively. Therefore, clinicians should consider using AIP for patients suffering from PAD and associated DFO.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic characteristics of biomarker for diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). We searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase and Medline for studies who report serological markers and DFO before December 2022. Studies must include at least one of the following diagnostic parameters for biomarkers: area under the curve, sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive value, negative predictive value. Two authors evaluated quality using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool. We included 19 papers. In this systematic review, there were 2854 subjects with 2134 (74.8%) of those patients being included in the meta-analysis. The most common biomarkers were erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT). A meta-analysis was then performed where data were evaluated with Forrest plots and receiver operating characteristic curves. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.72 and 0.75 for PCT, 0.72 and 0.76 for CRP and 0.70 and 0.77 for ESR. Pooled area under the curves for ESR, CRP and PCT were 0.83, 0.77 and 0.71, respectfully. Average diagnostic odds ratios were 16.1 (range 3.6-55.4), 14.3 (range 2.7-48.7) and 6.7 (range 3.6-10.4) for ESR, CRP and PCT, respectfully. None of the biomarkers we evaluated could be rated as \'outstanding\' to diagnose osteomyelitis. Based on the areas under the curve, ESR is an \'excellent\' biomarker to detect osteomyelitis, and CRP and PCT are \'acceptable\' biomarkers to diagnose osteomyelitis. Diagnostic odds ratios indicate that ESR, CRP and PCT are \'good\' or \'very good\' tools to identify osteomyelitis.

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) poses a significant challenge in the management of diabetic patients, often leading to severe complications and increased morbidity. Effective management of DFO requires a multidisciplinary approach, involving endocrinologists, infectious disease specialists, vascular surgeons, orthopaedic surgeons, and wound care experts. Early diagnosis is paramount, facilitated by advanced imaging techniques such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and bone scintigraphy. Once diagnosed, the treatment strategy hinges on a combination of medical and surgical interventions. Antibiotic therapy, guided by culture results, plays a central role in managing DFO. Tailored regimens targeting the specific pathogens involved are administered, often for prolonged durations. Surgical intervention becomes necessary when conservative measures fall short. Surgical approaches range from minimally invasive procedures, like percutaneous drainage, to more extensive interventions like debridement and bone resection. Prevention of DFO recurrence is equally vital, emphasising glycemic control, meticulous foot care, patient education, monitoring of at-risk signs, revascularization and early intervention when indicated. The management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis mandates a comprehensive strategy that addresses both the infectious and surgical aspects of the condition. A collaborative, interdisciplinary approach ensures timely diagnosis, tailored treatment, and holistic care. Further research into novel therapeutic modalities and long-term outcomes remains essential in refining the management of this complex and debilitating complication of diabetes.

This study aims to describe the healing times of patients who underwent bone resection compared to bone curettage for managing diabetic foot osteomyelitis and to compare short- and long-term complications. This analytical retrospective observational cohort study collected clinical records of patients from a specialized diabetic foot clinic who underwent resection or bone curettage between January 2017 and January 2022. After surgery, a 1-year follow-up was conducted to record healing times and short- and long-term complications. The study included thirty-one patients, with 19 (61.29%) undergoing resections and 11 (38.71%) undergoing bone curettages. The resection cohort had a mean healing time of 5.70 ± 6.05 weeks, whereas the curettage cohort had a mean healing time of 14.45 ± 11.78 weeks, showing a statistically significant difference (P = 0.011). No significant differences were observed in terms of short- and long-term complications. In the resection cohort, 12 (63.20%) experienced short-term complications, compared to eight (66.70%) in the curettage cohort (P = 0.842, χ2 = 0.40, OR = 1.16). In the resection cohort, n = 6 (31.60%) had long-term complications, while n = 3 (25.00%) in the curettage cohort experienced long-term complications (P = 0.694, χ2 = 0.155, OR = 0.72). Although there were no significant differences in short- and long-term complications between resection and curettage, the resection group showed shorter healing times.

This study analyzed the influence of diabetic nephropathy on the healing prognosis after conservative surgery in diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO). A retrospective observational study was carried out between January 2021 and December 2022 and involved 278 outpatients with a diagnosis of DFO at a specialized diabetic foot unit, including 74 (26.62%) patients with DN (group 2) and 204 (73.38%) patients without DN (group 1). There were 266 (95.70%) ulcers on the forefoot, 8 (2.90%) on the midfoot, and 4 (1.45%) on the hindfoot (p = 0.992). The healing rates were 85.1% (n = 63) for group 2 and 81.3% (n = 165) for group 1 (p = 0.457). When exploring the influence of DN on the risk of delayed ulcer healing, the results did not show a significant effect [12 (6; 28) weeks among patients with DN vs. 12 (6; 21) weeks among patients without DN; p = 0.576]. No significant differences were observed in complications, with one (2.59%) death occurring in group 1 (p = 0.296) and three minor amputations being performed in both groups [two (5.13%) amputations in group 1 vs. one amputation (9.09%) in group 2; p = 0.217]. Bone cultures were performed for a total of 190 patients (133 in group 1 and 57 in group 2). Of these, 176 positive bone cultures were isolated: 71 positive bone cultures (57.7%) were monomicrobial cultures in group 1, with 30 (56.6%) in group 2. There were 52 (42.3%) that had at least two microorganisms in group 1, and 23 (43.4%) in group 2 (p = 0.890). The most frequently prescribed oral antibiotic was amoxicillin/clavulanate (43.89%), followed by levofloxacin (28.4%), and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (14.7%). This study shows that DN does not have a significant influence on the healing prognosis of patients with DFO after conservative surgery.