The Western Pacific Region hosts the largest proportion of people with diabetes. Despite being a key diabetes-related complication, diabetic foot ulcer has been neglected in both prevention and treatment efforts. This narrative review highlights available data on the burden (either prevalence or incidence), as well as microbial profiles of diabetic foot ulcers in the Western Pacific Region, identifies data gaps, and discusses strategies to address these gaps. There are substantial gaps in epidemiological data and microbial profiles for many countries in the Western Pacific Region. Addressing these gaps require developing and strengthening data collection systems for effective surveillance and benchmarking of diabetes care.

This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the comparative diagnostic efficacy of [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography ([18F]FDG PET) and conventional imaging, MRI, and white blood cell (WBC) scintigraphy in detecting foot osteomyelitis among diabetic patients.

An exhaustive search was conducted within the PubMed and Embase databases to identify publications available up until February 2024. Studies were included if they evaluated the diagnostic efficacy of [18F]FDG PET or the comparative diagnostic performance between PET and (MRI or WBC scintigraphy). Two researchers independently assessed the quality of the included studies, utilizing the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Performance Studies (QUADAS-2) tool.

Nine retrospective or prospective studies involving 605 patients were included in the meta-analysis. For [18F]FDG PET, the overall sensitivity was 0.83(95% CI: 0.69-0.94), while the overall specificity was 0.92(95% CI: 0.86-0.97). In the head-to-head comparison, no significant difference of sensitivity was found between [18F]FDG PET and MRI (0.72 vs. 0.68, P=0.81), as well as between [18F]FDG PET and WBC scintigraphy (0.57 vs. 0.66, P=0.64). In addition, specificity was also found to be no significant difference between [18F]FDG PET and MRI (0.90 vs. 0.82, P=0.27), as well as [18F]FDG PET and WBC scintigraphy (0.81 vs. 0.93, P=0.09).

[18F]FDG PET demonstrates similar sensitivity and specificity to MRI and WBC scintigraphy in detecting foot osteomyelitis among diabetic patients. MRI, often cited as a primary choice in guidelines, might be preferred due to its lower cost and lower dose. Further larger sample prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) commonly occurs secondary to ulcerations of the skin. Empirical antibiotic agents are a key element of treatment and their use is dependent on local knowledge of the microbial spectrum of diabetic foot infections. This study aimed to retrospectively analyze the local microbiological profile, including bacterial culture/sensitivity results of DFO, and compare findings with literature. This study also aimed to review the concordance of microbiology results with national guidelines for the future treatment of DFO.

A retrospective review of clinical records was performed on patients who presented to the high-risk foot clinic, Townsville University Hospital, between 2018 and 2022. All patients older than 18 years and diagnosed with DFO were included. Our exclusion criteria included all other foot presentations, including trauma, vasculitis, and neoplasms.

On the basis of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 124 patients with DFO were selected. Most patients in the cohort were males (70.2%), non-Indigenous (68.5%), aged 50-69 years (55.6%), and with elevated HbA1c levels (>8.6). Chronic kidney disease (39.5%) and ischemic heart disease (41.9%) were common comorbidities. Of the pertinent microbial results, Staphylococcus aureus (~76%) was the most commonly isolated Gram-positive organism. Gram-positive bacteria were significantly increased in the elderly population with DFO (P < .05). All methicillin-resistant S aureus isolates were vancomycin- and cotrimoxazole-sensitive. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the predominant Gram-negative organism isolated (39.3%). P aeruginosa exhibited low sensitivity to ciprofloxacin.

This study has enhanced our understanding of the various microbial species underlying DFO at our center and may be generalizable.

Level IV, retrospective case series.

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.

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.

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%).

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.

Diabetes prevalence continues to increase worldwide, which has led to a rising incidence of diabetes-related foot infections (DFIs). There is significant local variation in the microbiology of DFIs, and Pseudomonas spp. is suggested to be more prevalent in subtropical climates. The aim of this study was to investigate the local microbiological findings in patients admitted to the hospital with DFIs. This retrospective study analysed data from all adult patients diagnosed with diabetes and admitted to the hospital for the treatment of a DFI between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2022. Both superficial wound swabs and tissue cultures were included. The Infectious Diseases Society of America classification system was used to categorise the severity of the DFI. Patient characteristics and demographics were analysed using descriptive statistics. One hundred fifty-one episodes of care were included. Most of the DFIs were classified as moderate infections 101/151 (67%). The most commonly isolated microorganism was Staphylococcus aureus (33%) followed by normal skin flora (11%) and β-haemolytic streptococci (7%). P. aeruginosa was isolated more commonly in those with chronic DFIs (10%) compared to those with acute DFIs (2%). Despite the frequent identification of S. aureus, 83% of patients received an antipseudomonal antibiotic. The introduction of multidisciplinary DFI rounds should be considered.

Infections of the bones and joints, if misdiagnosed, may result in serious morbidity and even mortality. A prompt diagnosis followed by appropriate management may reduce the socioeconomic impact of bone and joint infections. Morphologic imaging such as ultrasound and plain radiographs form the first line investigations, however, in early infections findings may be negative or nonspecific. Nuclear medicine imaging techniques play a complementary role to morphologic imaging in the diagnosis of bone and joint infections. The availability of hybrid systems (SPECT/CT, SPECT/MRI, PET/CT or PET/MRI) offers improved specificity with ability to assess the extent of infection. Bone scans are useful as a gatekeeper wherein negative scans rule out sepsis with a good accuracy, however positive scans are nondiagnostic and more specific tracers should be considered. These include the use of labeled white blood cells and antigranulocyte antibodies. Various qualitative and quantitative interpretation criteria have been suggested to improve the specificity of the scans. PET has better image resolution and 18F-FDG is the major tracer for PET imaging with applications in oncology and inflammatory/infective disorders. It has demonstrated improved sensitivity over the SPECT based tracers, however, still suffers from lack of specificity. 18F-FDG PET has been used to monitor therapy in bone and joint infections. Other less studied, noncommercialized SPECT and PET tracers such as 111In-Biotin, 99mTc-Ubiquicidin, 18F-Na-Fluoride, 18F-labeled white blood cells and 124I-Fialuridine to name a few have shown great promise, however, their role in various bone and joint infections has not been established. Hybrid imaging with PET or PET/MRI offers huge potential for improving diagnostics in infections of the joints and bones.

Diabetes-related foot disease (DFD) is a common, costly, and severe complication of diabetes mellitus. DFD is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality and poses a significant burden on patients, healthcare systems and society. While the detrimental impact of DFD is widely recognised, the precise financial implications of its management in Australia remain unclear due to inconsistent and inconclusive contemporary data. Therefore, the aim of this review was to identify, summarise and synthesise existing evidence to estimate the costs associated with DFD management in Australia.

Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, Joanna Briggs Institute EBP, and the Cochrane Library from November 2011 to July 2023. Australian studies investigating costs associated with DFD management were eligible for inclusion. Two independent reviewers performed the study selection, data extraction and quality assessment steps. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS 2022) checklist was used to assess study quality. A descriptive analysis was performed due to limited existing evidence and large heterogeneity between study populations to conduct meta-analyses.

Three economic evaluations were included in the review. One study was rated as 'poor', one as 'very good' and one as 'excellent' when assessed against the CHEERS checklist. The estimated cost of DFD management varied between studies and comparisons were not possible due to the different methodological approaches and data sources. The studies were unable to provide an overall cost of DFD with respect to all aspects of care as they did not capture the multi-faceted level of care throughout the entire patient journey between sectors and over time.

There is limited contemporary evidence for the costs associated with DFD management within Australia, particularly related to direct costs and resource utilisation. Further research into the economic impact of DFD management is needed to inform optimisation of national service delivery and improve health outcomes for individuals with DFD in Australia. Integrating real-world data on impact of clinical interventions with parallel economic evaluation could be a valuable approach for future research, which would offer a more comprehensive understanding of the clinical and economic outcomes beyond solely model-based evaluations.

PROSPERO Registration No. CRD42022290910.

Diabetes-related foot disease (DFD) - foot ulcers, infection, ischaemia - is a leading cause of hospitalisation, disability, and health care costs in Australia. The previous 2011 Australian guideline for DFD was outdated. We developed new Australian evidence-based guidelines for DFD by systematically adapting suitable international guidelines to the Australian context using the ADAPTE and GRADE approaches recommended by the NHMRC.

This article summarises the most relevant of the 98 recommendations made across six new guidelines for the general medical audience, including: prevention - screening, education, self-care, footwear, and treatments to prevent DFD; classification - classifications systems for ulcers, infection, ischaemia and auditing; peripheral artery disease (PAD) - examinations and imaging for diagnosis, severity classification, and treatments; infection - examinations, cultures, imaging and inflammatory markers for diagnosis, severity classification, and treatments; offloading - pressure offloading treatments for different ulcer types and locations; and wound healing - debridement, wound dressing selection principles and wound treatments for non-healing ulcers.

For people without DFD, key changes include using a new risk stratification system for screening, categorising risk and managing people at increased risk of DFD. For those categorised at increased risk of DFD, more specific self-monitoring, footwear prescription, surgical treatments, and activity management practices to prevent DFD have been recommended. For people with DFD, key changes include using new ulcer, infection and PAD classification systems for assessing, documenting and communicating DFD severity. These systems also inform more specific PAD, infection, pressure offloading, and wound healing management recommendations to resolve DFD.

Diabetic foot infection (DFI), including diabetic foot ulcer, is a serious complication of diabetes, particularly in the South Western Sydney (SWS) region where it is a leading cause of diabetes-related hospitalisations. Multidisciplinary team (MDT) involvement is effective at improving the health outcomes of DFI patients. This study investigated the impact of MDT (High Risk Foot Service, HRFS) on the length of stay and surgical outcomes of inpatients with DFI in a Sydney tertiary hospital.

A retrospective audit of electronic medical records of inpatient admissions for DFI at Campbelltown Hospital between January 2019 - December 2021, was performed. The main outcome of the study was MDT involvement, defined as having two or more specialities involved in the patient's treatment. The other measured variables included length of stay (defined as the total duration from admission to discharge), and surgical outcomes including debridement, minor amputation, and major amputation.

Over the three years, 78 participants presented to the hospital for 89 unique DFI admissions. There were 24 admissions in 2019, 28 admissions in 2020, and 37 admissions in 2021, with MDT attendance showing a steady increase at 62.5%, 75.0% and 83.8% respectively. Patients with serious comorbidities such as chronic kidney disease were more likely to have MDT involvement (84.8% vs. 15.2%, P = 0.048). Imaging was more likely to be performed with MDT involvement (78.8% vs. 21.3%, p < 0.05). Comparing patients who received and did not receive MDT care, the mean HbA1c (%) (8.4 ± 2.0 vs. 8.2 ± 2.7, P = 0.701), median length of stay (LOS: 7.8, IQR 15.0 days vs. 4.8 IQR 7.9 days, P = 0.243) and rate of surgical outcomes (74.6% vs. 72.7%, P = 0.262) were similar. Patients who required major amputation had significantly longer LOS (24 days, IQR 21.5 vs. 5.2 days, IQR 13.0, P = 0.004) but similar HbA1c (P = 0.552) compared to those who had conservative intervention.

Adopting an MDT approach was associated with more thorough investigation of DFI, with similar rates of surgical outcomes. Further research on the impacts of MDT on length of stay and surgical outcomes of DFI patients in other SWS hospitals is needed.

To determine trends in the incidence of hospitalizations and amputations for diabetes-related foot disease (DFD) in Australia.

We included 70,766 people with type 1, and 1,087,706 with type 2 diabetes from the Australian diabetes registry from 2010 to 2019, linked to hospital admissions databases. Trends in age-adjusted incidence were summarized as annual percent changes (APC).

In people with type 1 diabetes, total DFD hospitalizations increased from 20.8 to 30.5 per 1,000 person-years between 2010 and 2019 (APC: 5.1% (95% CI: 3.5, 6.8)), including increases for ulceration (13.3% (2.9, 24.7)), osteomyelitis (5.6% (2.7, 8.7)), peripheral arterial disease (7.7% (3.7, 11.9)), and neuropathy (8.7% (5.5, 12.0)). In people with type 2 diabetes, DFD hospitalizations changed from 18.6 to 24.8 per 1,000 person-years between 2010 and 2019 (APC: 4.5% (3.6, 5.4); 2012-2019), including increases for ulceration (8.7% (4.0, 13.7)), cellulitis (5.4% (3.7, 7.0)), osteomyelitis (6.7% (5.7, 7.7)), and neuropathy (6.9% (5.2, 8.5)). Amputations were stable in type 1, whereas in type 2, above knee amputations decreased (-6.0% (-9.1, -2.7). Adjustment for diabetes duration attenuated the magnitude of most increases, but many remained significant.

DFD hospitalizations increased markedly in Australia, mainly driven by ulceration and neuropathy, highlighting the importance of managing DFD to prevent hospitalizations.