Restricted accessReview articleFirst published online 2025
Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Different Non-surgical Offloading Interventions for Diabetic Foot Ulcers: A Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
The aim of this study is to conduct a network meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of different non-surgical offloading interventions for patients with diabetic foot ulcers.
Methods
We searched PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTS) on the efficacy of non-surgical interventions for DFU offloading. Outcome measures included the rate of ulcer healing, reduction in ulcer area, and incidence of adverse events. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool version was used to assess the risk of bias of the included trials.
Results
A total of 22 RCTs involving 1226 patients were included. Network meta-analysis showed that compared to removable knee high offloading device (OR = 3.66, 95% CI (1.78, 8.46)], removable ankle high offloading device (OR = 3.17, 95% CI (1.32, 7.85)], therapeutic shoe (OR = 3.72, 95% CI (1.53, 9.78)], standard treatment (OR = 4.15, 95% CI (1.05, 13.89)], TCC significantly increased the ulcer healing rate (P < .05). The analyses did not reveal any statistically significant differences between the results of the various types of non-surgical offloading measures in terms of ulcer reduction area and incidence of adverse events. The ranking probability graph showed that TCC (SUCRA = 0.59) was most likely to improve ulcer healing rates, therapeutic shoes (SUCRA = 0.25) performed best in terms of ulcer reduction area, and non-removable walkers (SUCRA = 0.63) were most likely to reduce the incidence of adverse events.
Conclusions
Non-removable offloading devices (TCC and non-removable walkers) have the best effectiveness and safety in the non-surgical offloading interventions of patients with diabetic foot ulcers, which is of great significance in promoting ulcer healing and improving prognosis.
ArmstrongDGTanTWBoultonAJMBusSA. Diabetic foot ulcers: A review[J]. JAMA. 2023;330(1):62-75.
2.
JeffcoateWBoykoEJGameFCowledPSennevilleEFitridgeR. Causes, prevention, and management of diabetes-related foot ulcers. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol.2024;12(7):472-482.
3.
ZhangYLazzariniPAMcPhailSMvan NettenJJArmstrongDGPacellaRE. Global disability burdens of diabetes-related lower-extremity complications in 1990 and 2016. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(5):964-974.
4.
ArmstrongDGSwerdlowMAArmstrongAAConteMSPadulaWVBusSA. Five year mortality and direct costs of care for people with diabetic foot complications are comparable to cancer. J Foot Ankle Res.2020;13(1):16.
5.
PedrasSVilhenaECarvalhoRPereiraMG. Quality of life following a lower limb amputation in diabetic patients: a longitudinal and multicenter study. Psychiatry. 2020;83(1):47-57.
6.
BusSAArmstrongDGCrewsRT, et al.Guidelines on offloading foot ulcers in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2023 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2024;40(3):e3647.
7.
LazzariniPACrewsRTvan NettenJJ, et al.Measuring plantar tissue stress in people with diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a critical concept in diabetic foot management. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2019;13(5):869-880.
8.
LazzariniPAArmstrongDGCrewsRT, et al.Effectiveness of offloading interventions for people with diabetes-related foot ulcers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2024;40(3):e3650.
9.
BusSA. The role of pressure offloading on diabetic foot ulcer healing and prevention of recurrence. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;138(3 Suppl):179S-187S.
10.
SchaperNCvan NettenJJApelqvistJBusSAHinchliffeRJLipskyBA; IWGDF Editorial Board. Practical Guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease (IWGDF 2019 update). Diabetes Metab Res Rev.2020;36(Suppl 1):e3266.
11.
LazzariniPAJarlGGoodayC, et al.Effectiveness of offloading interventions to heal foot ulcers in persons with diabetes: a systematic review. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020;36(Suppl 1):e3275.
12.
LiBLinAHuangJ, et al.Total contact casts versus removable offloading interventions for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023;14:1234761.
13.
HulshofCMvan NettenJJPijnappelsMBusSA. The role of foot-loading factors and their associations with ulcer development and ulcer healing in people with diabetes: a systematic review. J Clin Med. 2020;9(11):3591.
14.
YammineKAssiC. Surgical offloading techniques should be used more often and earlier in treating forefoot diabetic ulcers: an evidence-based review. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2020;19(2):112-119.
15.
ShimSRYoonBHShinISBaeJM. Network meta-analysis: application and practice using Stata. Epidemiol Health. 2017;39:e2017047.
16.
PageMJMcKenzieJEBossuytPM, et al.The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Br Med J.2021;372:n71.
17.
HigginsJThomasJChandlerJ, et al.Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Wiley-Blackwell, version 6.5, 2024.
18.
NingPLiuYKangJCaoHZhangJ. Comparison of healing effectiveness of different debridement approaches for diabetic foot ulcers: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Front Public Health. 2023;11:1271706.
19.
YaoLLuoYWangY, et al.Comparative efficacy of various preventive methods for exposure keratopathy among critically ill patients: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Nurs Stud.2021;118:103926.
20.
KhalifaWAArgoonSAAbdEllah-AlawiMH. Determinants of healing of diabetic foot ulcer comparing two offloading modalities: A randomized prospective study. Foot (Edinb). 2023;56:102016.
21.
BaghavathPRManovahAPraveenRRajEK. The comparison of total contact casting with conventional dressing for wound healing in patients with diabetic foot ulcer. Int J Acad Med Pharm. 2023;5(1):861-865.
22.
PotierLFrançoisMDardariD, et al.Comparison of a new versus standard removable offloading device in patients with neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers: a French national, multicentre, open-label randomized, controlled trial. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2020;8(1):e000954.
23.
SahuBPrustyATuduB. Total contact casting versus traditional dressing in diabetic foot ulcers. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2018;26(3):2309499018802486.
24.
BusSAvan NettenJJKottinkAI, et al.The efficacy of removable devices to offload and heal neuropathic plantar forefoot ulcers in people with diabetes: a single-blinded multicentre randomised controlled trial. Int Wound J. 2018;15(1):65-74.
25.
NajafiBGrewalGSBhararaMMenziesRTalalTKArmstrongDG. Can’t stand the pressure: the association between unprotected standing, walking, and wound healing in people with diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017;11(4):657-667.
26.
PiaggesiAGorettiCIacopiE, et al.Comparison of removable and irremovable walking boot to total contact casting in offloading the neuropathic diabetic foot ulceration. Foot Ankle Int.2016;37(8):855-861.
27.
LaveryLAHigginsKRLa FontaineJZamoranoRGConstantinidesGPKimPJ. Randomised clinical trial to compare total contact casts, healing sandals and a shear-reducing removable boot to heal diabetic foot ulcers. Int Wound J. 2015;12(6):710-715.
28.
ChakrabortyPPRaySBiswasD, et al.A comparative study between total contact cast and pressure-relieving ankle foot orthosis in diabetic neuropathic foot ulcers. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015;9(2):302-8.
29.
MiyanZAhmedJZaidiSIAhmedaniMYFawwadABasitA. Use of locally made off-loading techniques for diabetic plantar foot ulcer in Karachi, Pakistan. Int Wound J. 2014;11(6):691-5.
30.
GutekunstDJHastingsMKBohnertKLStrubeMJSinacoreDR. Removable cast walker boots yield greater forefoot off-loading than total contact casts. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2011;26(6):649-654.
31.
FagliaECaravaggiCClericiG, et al.Effectiveness of removable walker cast versus nonremovable fiberglass off-bearing cast in the healing of diabetic plantar foot ulcer: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(7):1419-23.
32.
Van De WegFBVan Der WindtDAVahlAC. Wound healing: total contact cast vs. custom-made temporary footwear for patients with diabetic foot ulceration. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2008;32(1):3-11.
33.
GangulySChakrabortyKMandalPK, et al.A comparative study between total contact casting and conventional dressings in the non-surgical management of diabetic plantar foot ulcers. J Indian Med Assoc. 2008;106(4):237-9. 244.
34.
CaravaggiCSganzaroliAFabbiM, et al.Nonwindowed nonremovable fiberglass off-loading cast versus removable pneumatic cast (AircastXP Diabetic Walker) in the treatment of neuropathic noninfected plantar ulcers: a randomized prospective trial. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(10):2577-8.
35.
PiaggesiAMacchiariniSRizzoL, et al.An off-the-shelf instant contact casting device for the management of diabetic foot ulcers: a randomized prospective trial versus traditional fiberglass cast. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(3):586-90.
36.
ArmstrongDGLaveryLAWuSBoultonAJ. Evaluation of removable and irremovable cast walkers in the healing of diabetic foot wounds: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(3):551-4.
37.
KatzIAHarlanAMiranda-PalmaB, et al.A randomized trial of two irremovable off-loading devices in the management of plantar neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(3):555-9.
38.
ZimnySSchatzHPfohlU. The effects of applied felted foam on wound healing and healing times in the therapy of neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers. Diabet Med. 2003;20(8):622-5.
39.
ArmstrongDGNguyenHCLaveryLAvan SchieCHBoultonAJHarklessLB. Off-loading the diabetic foot wound: a randomized clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2001;24(6):1019-1022.
40.
CaravaggiCFagliaEDe GiglioR, et al.Effectiveness and safety of a nonremovable fiberglass off-bearing cast versus a therapeutic shoe in the treatment of neuropathic foot ulcers: a randomized study. Diabetes Care. 2000;23(12):1746-51.
41.
MuellerMJDiamondJESinacoreDR, et al.Total contact casting in treatment of diabetic plantar ulcers. Controlled clinical trial. Diabetes Care.1989;12(6):384-8.
42.
MajidUArgáezC. Off-loading devices for people with diabetic neuropathic foot ulcers: A rapid qualitative review [Internet]. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2020.
43.
LazzariniPAJarlG. Knee-high devices are gold in closing the foot ulcer gap: a review of offloading treatments to heal diabetic foot ulcers. Medicina (Kaunas). 2021;57(9):941.
44.
OntarioHQ. Fibreglass total contact casting, removable cast walkers, and irremovable cast walkers to treat diabetic neuropathic foot ulcers: a health technology assessment. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2017;17(12):1-124.
RacaruSBolton SaghdaouiLRoy ChoudhuryJWellsMDaviesAH. Offloading treatment in people with diabetic foot disease: A systematic scoping review on adherence to foot offloading. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2022;16(5):102493.
47.
GaunaCRomeoFScatenaA, et al.Offloading systems for the treatment of neuropathic foot ulcers in patients with diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for the development of the Italian guidelines for the treatment of diabetic foot syndrome. Acta Diabetol. 2024;61(6):693-703.
48.
JarlGvan NettenJJLazzariniPACrewsRTNajafiBMuellerMJ. Should weight-bearing activity be reduced during healing of plantar diabetic foot ulcers, even when using appropriate offloading devices?Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2021;175:108733.
49.
FernandoMEHorsleyMJonesS, et al.Australian guideline on offloading treatment for foot ulcers: part of the 2021 Australian evidence-based guidelines for diabetes-related foot disease. J Foot Ankle Res. 2022;15(1):31.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
