Hydrogel dressings for diabetic foot ulcer: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract

AbstractAimTo investigate the differences in utility between conventional dressings and hydrogel dressings for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer (DFU).MethodsThe PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP and Wanfang databases were systematically searched up to 21 January 2023. Fixed/random‐effect models were used to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the effect size analysis, with heterogeneity determined by I2 statistics. Subgroup analyses of different classes of hydrogel were also conducted.ResultsA total of 15 randomized controlled trials with 872 patients were eligible for the present analysis. Compared with conventional dressings, hydrogel dressings significantly improved the healing rate (OR 4.09, 95% CI 2.83 to 5.91), shortened the healing time (MD −11.38, 95% CI −13.11 to −9.66), enhanced granulation formation (MD −3.60, 95% CI −4.21 to −3.00) and epithelial formation (MD −2.82, 95% CI −3.19 to −2.46), and reduced the incidence of bacterial infection (OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.18).ConclusionThe meta‐analysis showed that hydrogel dressings are more effective in treating DFU compared with conventional dressings.