English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness of moist exposed burn ointment (MEBO) for diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). Two researchers independently assessed the quality and validity of included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in 7 electronic databases. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane handbook guidelines. Twenty seven trials which include 1,979 patients were involved for analysis. Comparison of the same intervention strategies revealed significant differences in total effectiveness rates between BEBO and conventional therapy group (Risk Ratio [RR], 6.36, [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.20, 12.64], P < 0.00001); MEBO combined with standard therapy (Risk Ratio [RR], 1.19, [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.08, 1.31], P = 0.0007); and healing time of DFU (Mean Difference [MD], 14.15, [95% confidence interval (CI), -18.14, -10.17], P < 0.00001). MEBO may be effective for treating DFU. However, a firm conclusion could not be reached because of the poor quality of the included trials. Further trials with higher quality are justified.       Key words: Exposed wound ointment (MEBO), diabetic foot ulcers (DFU), recombinant bovine, basic fibroblast growth factor (rb-bFGF), vacuum sealing drainage (VSD).

Is moist exposed burn ointment effective for diabetic foot ulcers? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials