Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Sep 14;2015(9):CD008599.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008599.pub2.

Debridement for venous leg ulcers

Georgina Gethin  1 , Seamus Cowman, Dinanda N Kolbach
Affiliations

Debridement for venous leg ulcers

Georgina Gethin et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Venous ulcers (also known as varicose or venous stasis ulcers) are a chronic, recurring and debilitating condition that affects up to 1% of the population. Best practice documents and expert opinion suggests that the removal of devitalised tissue from venous ulcers (debridement) by any one of six methods helps to promote healing. However, to date there has been no review of the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to support this.

Objectives: To determine the effects of different debriding methods or debridement versus no debridement, on the rate of debridement and wound healing in venous leg ulcers.

Search methods: In February 2015 we searched: The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE and EBSCO CINAHL. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting. In addition we handsearched conference proceedings, journals not cited in MEDLINE, and the bibliographies of all retrieved publications to identify potential studies. We made contact with the pharmaceutical industry to enquire about any completed studies.

Selection criteria: We included RCTs, either published or unpublished, which compared two methods of debridement or compared debridement with no debridement. We presented study results in a narrative form, as meta-analysis was not possible.

Data collection and analysis: Independently, two review authors completed all study selection, data extraction and assessment of trial quality; resolution of disagreements was completed by a third review author.

Main results: We identified 10 RCTs involving 715 participants. Eight RCTs evaluated autolytic debridement and included the following agents or dressings: biocellulose wound dressing (BWD), non-adherent dressing, honey gel, hydrogel (gel formula), hydrofibre dressing, hydrocolloid dressings, dextranomer beads, Edinburgh University Solution of Lime (EUSOL) and paraffin gauze. Two RCTs evaluated enzymatic preparations and one evaluated biosurgical debridement. No RCTs evaluated surgical, sharp or mechanical methods of debridement, or debridement versus no debridement. Most trials were at a high risk of bias.Three RCTs assessed the number of wounds completely debrided. All three of these trials compared two different methods of autolytic debridement (234 participants), with two studies reporting statistically significant results: one study (100 participants) reported that 40/50 (80%) ulcers treated with dextranomer beads and 7/50 (14%) treated with EUSOL achieved complete debridement (RR 5.71, 95% CI 2.84 to 11.52); while the other trial (86 participants) reported the number of ulcers completely debrided as 31/46 (76%) for hydrogel versus 18/40 (45%) for paraffin gauze (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.99). One study (48 participants) reported that by 12 weeks, 15/18 (84%) ulcers treated with BWD had achieved a 75% to 100% clean, granulating wound bed versus 4/15 (26%) treated with non-adherent petrolatum emulsion-impregnated gauze.Four trials assessed the mean time to achieve debridement: one (86 participants) compared two autolytic debridement methods, two compared autolytic methods with enzymatic debridement (71 participants), and the last (12 participants) compared autolytic with biosurgical debridement; none of the results achieved statistical significance.Two trials that assessed autolytic debridement methods reported the number of wounds healed at 12 weeks. One trial (108 participants) reported that 24/54 (44%) ulcers treated with honey healed versus 18/54 (33%) treated with hydrogel (RR (adjusted for baseline wound diameter) 1.38, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.88; P value 0.037). The second trial (48 participants) reported that 7/25 (28%) ulcers treated with BWD healed versus 7/23 (30%) treated with non-adherent dressing.Reduction in wound size was assessed in five trials (444 participants) in which two autolytic methods were compared. Results were statistically significant in one three-armed trial (153 participants) when cadexomer iodine was compared to paraffin gauze (mean difference 24.9 cm², 95% CI 7.27 to 42.53, P value 0.006) and hydrocolloid compared to paraffin gauze (mean difference 23.8 cm², 95% CI 5.48 to 42.12, P value 0.01). A second trial that assessed reduction in wound size based its results on median differences and, at four weeks, produced a statistically significantly result that favoured honey over hydrogel (P value < 0.001). The other three trials reported no statistically significant results for reduction in wound size, although one trial reported that the mean percentage reduction in wound area was greater at six and 12 weeks for BWD versus a non-adherent dressing (44% versus 24% week 6; 74% versus 54% week 12).Pain was assessed in six trials (544 participants) that compared two autolytic debridement methods, but the results were not statistically significant. No serious adverse events were reported in any trial.

Authors' conclusions: There is limited evidence to suggest that actively debriding a venous leg ulcer has a clinically significant impact on healing. The overall small number of participants, low number of studies and lack of meta-analysis in this review precludes any strong conclusions of benefit. Comparisons of different autolytic agents (hydrogel versus paraffin gauze; Dextranomer beads versus EUSOL and BWD versus non-adherent dressings) and Larvae versus hydrogel all showed statistically significant results for numbers of wounds debrided. Larger trials with follow up to healing are required.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The following authors (GG, SC) have completed a randomised controlled trial that was included in this review (Gethin G (2007) Manuka honey vs. hydrogel ‐ a prospective, open label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial to compare desloughing efficacy and healing outcomes in venous ulcers. PhD Thesis). Data from this study was extracted by SC and verified by DK. GG entered data from all studies and this was checked by SC and DK. GG has received honoraria for presenting at conferences on the topic of wound care from Smith & Nephew, Convatec, Fannin Medical, Dermasciences and Healthcare 21. These companies manufacture and/or distribute products for debridement. SC: nothing to declare. DK: nothing to declare.

Editorial base comment: this review is not compliant with Cochrane's current Commercial Sponsorship policy.

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram
2
2
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies
3
3
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study
4
4
Forest plot of comparison: 1 Autolytic versus autolytic, outcome: 1.1 Wounds completely debrided
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 Autolytic versus autolytic, Outcome 1 Wounds completely debrided.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 Autolytic versus autolytic, Outcome 2 Number of wounds healed.
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 Autolytic versus autolytic, Outcome 3 Percentage reduction in wound size at 4 weeks.
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2 Enzymatic versus autolytic, Outcome 1 Percentage reduction in wound size at 7 days.
3.1
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3 Biosurgical versus autolytic, Outcome 1 Wounds completely debrided:.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

  • doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008599

References

References to studies included in this review

Alvarez 2012 {published data only}
    1. Alvarez O, Patel M, Philips T, Menzoian J, Brown Etris M, Andriessen A. Prospective, randomised, controlled, multi‐centre clinical trial of a biocellulose wound dressing for the treatment of venous ulcers. Conference of European Wound Management Association. Denmark: EWMA, 2010:23.
    1. Alvarez O, Philips T, Menzoian J, Patel M, Andriessen A. An RCT to compare a bio‐cellulose wound dressing with a non‐adherent dressing in VLUs. Journal of Wound Care 2012;21(9):448‐53. - PubMed
    1. Alvarez OM, Patel M, Booker J, Markowitz L. Effectiveness of a biocellulose wound dressing for the treatment of chronic venous leg ulcers: results of a single centre randomised study involving 24 patients. Wounds: A Compendium of Clinical Research and Practice 2004;16(7):224‐33.
Gethin 2007 {unpublished data only}
    1. Gethin G, Cowman S. Manuka honey vs. hydrogel ‐ a prospective, open label, multicenter, randomised controlled trial to compare desloughing efficacy and healing outcomes in venous ulcers. PhD 2007. - PubMed
    1. Gethin G, Cowman S. Manuka honey vs. hydrogel‐a prospective, open label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial to compare desloughing efficacy and healing outcomes in venous ulcers. Journal of Clinical Nursing 2009;18(3):466‐74. - PubMed
Groenewald 1980 {published data only}
    1. Groenewald JH. An evaluation of dextranomer as a cleansing agent in the treatment of the post‐phlebitic stasis ulcer. South African Medical Journal 1980;57:809‐15. - PubMed
Hansson 1998 {published data only}
    1. Hansson C and the Cadexomer Iodine Study Group. The effects of cadexomer iodine paste in the treatment of venous leg ulcers compared with hydrocolloid dressing and paraffin gauze dressing. International Journal of Dermatology 1998;37:390‐96. - PubMed
    1. Mansson T, Avrach W, Hansson C, Karlsmark O, Kristensen O, Menke H, et al. Effect of Iodosorb dressing, Duoderm and vaseline gauze on symptomatic parameters in exuding venous leg ulcers. Cherry G, editor(s). 5th European Conference on Advances in Wound Managment; November 21‐24; Harrogate, UK. London: Macmillan Magazines, 1995:31‐2.
    1. Stenquist B, Hansson C, Persson L, Nordin P, Roed‐Peterson J, Westerhof W, et al. The effects of cadexomer iodine dressing treatment on exuding, sloughy ulcers in the lower part of the leg in comparison with hydrocolloid dressing: an open, controlled multicenter trial. Symposium on Advanced Wound Care and Medical Research Forum on Wound Repair, Atlanta, GA, USA. 1996.
Jasiel 1996 {published data only}
    1. Jasiel E, Nowak A, Gwiezdzinski Z, Bowszyc J, Szarmach H, Czabanowska J, et al. A randomised, controlled, parallel‐group clinical trial of a new debriding agent (Sterigel) versus paraffin gauze in the treatment of necrotic venous leg ulcers. Proceedings of 6th European Conference on Advances in Wound Management. 1996:81‐3.
Konig 2005 {published data only}
    1. Konig M, Vanscheidt W, Augustin M, Kapp H. Enzymatic versus autolytic debridement of chronic leg ulcers: a prospective randomised trial. Journal of Wound Care 2005;14(7):320‐3. - PubMed
Skog 1983 {published data only}
    1. Skog E, Arnesjo B, Troeng T, Gjoress J, Bergljung L, Gundersen J, et al. A randomised trial comparing cadexomer iodine and standard treatment in the out‐patient management of chronic venous ulcers. British Journal of Dermatology 1983;109:77‐83. - PubMed
Wayman 2000 {published data only}
    1. Wayman J, Nirojogi V, Walker A, Sowinski A, Walker M. The cost effectiveness of larval therapy in venous ulcers. Journal of Tissue Viability 2000;10(3):91‐4. - PubMed
Westerhof 1990 {published data only}
    1. Westerhof W, Ginkel CJ, Cohen EB, Mekkes JR. Prospective randomized study comparing the debriding effect of krill enzymes and an enzymatic treatment in venous leg ulcers. Dermatologica 1990;181:293‐7. - PubMed
Wild 2010 {published data only}
    1. Wild T, Eberlein T, Andriessen A. Wound cleansing efficacy of two cellulose‐based dressings. Wounds UK 2010;6(3):14‐21.

References to studies excluded from this review

Andersen 2002 {published data only}
    1. Anderson KE, Franken CP, Gad P, Larsen AM, Larsen JR, Neer PA, et al. A randomised, controlled study to compare the effectiveness of two foam dressings in the management of lower leg ulcers. Ostomy Wound Management 2002;48(8):34‐41.
Armstrong 1996 {published data only}
    1. Armstrong SH, Brown DA, Hill E, Ruckley CV, Pucheault M, Hofman D. A randomised comparative clinical trial of a new hydrofibre dressing versus an alginate dressing in the treatment of exuding leg ulcers. Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Advances in Wound Management 1995, Harrogate, United Kingdom. London: MacMillan Magazines, 1996:197‐8.
Bowszyc 1994 {published data only}
    1. Bowszyc J, Silny W, Bowszyc‐Dmochowska M, Kazmierowski M, Ben Amer HM, Garbowska T. [A randomised controlled comparative clinical trial of Lyofoam versus Granuflex in the treatment of venous leg ulcers]. 3rd European Conference on Advances in Wound Management; 1993 October 19‐22, Harrogate, United Kingdom. London: MacMillan Magazines, 1994:34‐7.
Boxer 1969 {published data only}
    1. Boxer M, Bernstein H. Debridement of dermal ulcers and decubiti with collagenase. Geriatrics 1969;July:75‐86. - PubMed
Bressieux 2007 {published data only}
    1. Bressieux J, Gerard J, Schmutz J, Bohbot N, Bohbot S. Leg ulcers and a new foam dressing results of two French multicenter clinical studies. 39th Annual Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses Annual Conference, 9‐13 June, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. 2007; Vol. 34:S67.
Burgess 1993 {published data only}
    1. Burgess B. An investigation of hydrocolloids. Professional Nurse 1990;8(7):3‐6. - PubMed
Caputo 2008 {published data only (unpublished sought but not used)}
    1. Caputo WJ, Beggs DJ, DeFede J, Simm L, Dharma H. A prospective randomised controlled clinical trial comparing hydrosurgery debridement with conventional surgical debridement in lower extremity ulcers. International Wound Journal 2008;5(2):288‐94. - PMC - PubMed
Cardinal 2009 {published data only}
    1. Cardinal M, Eisenbud D, Armstrong D, Zelen C, Driver V, Attinger C, et al. Serial surgical debridement: a retrospective study on clinical outcomes in chronic lower extremity wounds. Wound Repair and Regeneration 2009;17:306‐11. - PubMed
Contretas‐Ruiz 2004 {published data only}
    1. Contretas‐Ruiz J, Fuentes‐Suarez S, Arroyo‐Escalante S, Sosa‐De‐Martinez C, Maravilla‐Franco E, Dominguez‐Cherit J. Larval debridement therapy to control infection in venous leg ulcers a comparative study. 2nd World Union of Wound Healing Socieities Meeting, 8‐13 July. Paris, 2004.
Dereure 2012 {published data only}
    1. Dereure O, Mikosinki J, Zegota Z, Allaert F. RCT to evaluate a hyaluronic acid containing gauze pad in leg ulcers of venous or mixed aetiology. Journal of Wound Care 2012;21(11):539‐47. - PubMed
Dumville 2009 {published data only (unpublished sought but not used)}
    1. Dumville JC, Worthy G, Bland JM, Cullum N, Dowson C, Iglesias C, et al. Larval therapy for leg ulcers: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2009;doi:10.1136/bmj.b773:338:b773. - PMC - PubMed
Eriksson 1984 {published data only}
    1. Eriksson G. Comparative study of hydrocolloid dressings and double layer bandages in treatment of venous stasis ulceration. In: Ryan TJ editor(s). An Environment for Healing: The Role of Occlusion. London: Royal Society of Medicine, 1984:11‐3.
Falabella 1998 {published data only}
    1. Falabella AF, Carson P, Eaglstein WH, Falanga V. The safety and efficacy of a proteolytic ointment in the treatment of chronic ulcers of the lower extremity. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 1998;39(5 (Pt 1)):737‐40. - PubMed
Fischer 1984 {published data only}
    1. Fischer H, Gilliet F, Hornemann M, Leyh F, Lindemayr H, Stegmann W, et al. Enzymatic debridement in venous ulcus cruris. Report of a multicentre clinical comparative study with various enzyme preparations. Fortschritte des Medizin 1984;102(10):281‐3. - PubMed
Floden 1978 {published data only}
    1. Floden C, Wikstrom K. Controlled clinical trial with dextranomer (Debrisan) on venous leg ulcers. Current Therapeutic Research 1978;24(7):753‐60.
Forsling 1988 {published data only}
    1. Forsling E. Comparison of saline and streptokinase‐streptodornase in the treatment of leg ulcers. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1988;33:637‐8. - PubMed
Gamborg 1990 {published data only}
    1. Gamborg NP, Munk MS, Stromberg L. Treatment of chronic leg ulcers with a hydrocolloid dressing. Acta Dermato‐Venerologica Supplementum 1990;152:1‐12. - PubMed
Gordon 1975 {published data only}
    1. Gordon B. The use of topical proteolytic enzymes in the treatment of post‐thrombotic leg ulcers. The British Journal of Clinical Practice 1975;29(6):143‐6. - PubMed
Gray 2008 {published data only}
    1. Gray M. Is larval (maggot) debridement effective for removal of necrotic tissue from chronic wounds?. Journal Wound Ostomy Continence Nursing 2008;35(4):378‐84. - PubMed
Groenewald 1981 {published data only}
    1. Groenewald JH. The treatment of varicose stasis ulcers: a controlled trial. Schweizerische Rundschau fur Medizin Praxis 1981;70(28):1273‐8. - PubMed
Grotewohl 1994 {published data only}
    1. Grotewohl JH. Phase directed wound treatment of leg ulcers. Experiences with application of the new hydrogel. Zeitschrift fur Allgemeinmedizin 1994;70(9):351‐4.
Harcup 1986 {published data only}
    1. Harcup JW, Saul PA. A study of the effect of cadexomer iodine in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. The British Journal of Clinical Practice 1986;40(9):360‐4. - PubMed
Hellgren 1983 {published data only}
    1. Hellgren L. Cleansing properties of stabilised trypsin and streptokinase‐streptodornase in necrotic leg ulcers. European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1983;24:623‐8. - PubMed
Hillstrom 1988 {published data only}
    1. Hillstrom L. Iodosorb compared to standard treatment in chronic venous leg ulcers ‐ a multicentre study. Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica Supplementum 1988;544:53‐6. - PubMed
Holloway 1989 {published data only}
    1. Holloway GA, Johansen KA, Barnes R, Pierce G. Multicenter trial of cadexomer iodine to treat venous stasis ulcer. Western Journal of Medicine 1989;151(1):35‐8. - PMC - PubMed
Hulkko 1981 {published data only}
    1. Hulkko A, Holopainen YV, Orava S, Kangas J, Kuusisto P, Hyvarinen E, et al. Comparison of dextranomer and streptokinase‐streptodornase in the treatment of venous leg ulcers and other infected wounds. Annales Chirugiae et Gynaecologiae 1981;70:65‐70. - PubMed
Jorgensen 2005 {published data only}
    1. Jorgensen B, Price P, Andersen E, Gottrup F, Bech‐Thomsen N, Scanlon E, et al. The silver‐releasing foam dressing, Contreet Foam, promotes faster healing of critically colonised venous leg ulcers: a randomised, controlled trial. International Wound Journal 2005;2(1):64‐73. - PMC - PubMed
Laudanska 1988 {published data only}
    1. Laudanska H, Gustavson B. In‐patient treatment of chronic varicose venous ulcers. A randomized trial of cadexomer iodine versus standard dressings. Journal of International Medical Research 1988;16(6):428‐35. - PubMed
Leach 2006 {published data only}
    1. Leach MJ, Pincombe J, Foster G. Clinical efficacy of horsechestnut seed extract in the treatment of venous ulceration. Journal of Wound Care 2006;15(4):159‐67. - PubMed
Lindsay 1986 {published data only}
    1. Lindsay G, Latta D, Lyons KG, Livingstone ED, Thomson W. A study in general practice of the efficacy of cadexomer iodine in venous leg ulcers treated on alternate days. Acta Therapeutica 1986;12:141‐7.
Lok 1999 {published data only}
    1. Lok C, Paul C, Amblard P. EMLA cream for the debridement of venous leg ulcers. The Journal of Family Practice 1999;48(5):332. - PubMed
Marazzi 2006 {published data only}
    1. Marazzi M, Stefani A, Chiaratti A, Ordanini M, Falcone L, Rapisarda V. Effect of enzymatic debridement with collagenase on acute and chronic hard‐to‐heal wounds. Journal of Wound Care 2006;15(5):222‐7. - PubMed
Mekkes 1992 {published data only}
    1. Mekkes JR, Westerhof W. Debridement of necrotic leg ulcers by means of polysaccharide pads. Jaarganag Tidschrift voor Therapie Geneesmiddel en Onderzoek 1992;17(9):253‐8, 277.
Mudge 2014 {published data only}
    1. Mudge E, Price P, Neal W, Harding K. A randomized controlled trial of larval therapy for the debridement of leg ulcers: results of a multicentre, randomized, controlled, open, observer blind, parallel group study. Wound Repair and Regeneration 2014;22:43‐51. - PubMed
Munter 2006 {published data only}
    1. Munter K, Beele H, Russell L, Crespi A, Grochenig E, Basse P, et al. Effect of a sustained silver‐releasing dressing on ulcers with delayed healing: the CONTOP study. Journal of Wound Care 2006;15(5):199‐206. - PubMed
Nelson 1995 {published data only}
    1. Nelson EA, Ruckley CV, Harper DR, Gibson B, Dale J, Prescott R. A randomised trial of a knitted viscose dressing and a hydrocolloid dressing in the treatment of chronic venous ulceration. Phlebology (Supplement) 1995;1:913‐4.
Olyaie 2013 {published data only}
    1. Olyaie M, Samiee Rad F, Elahifar M, Garkaz A, Mahsa G. High‐frequency and noncontact low‐frequency ultrasound therapy for venous leg ulcer treatment: A randomized, controlled study. Ostomy Wound Management 2013;59(8):14‐20. - PubMed
Robinson 1995 {published data only}
    1. Robinson BJ. A cost‐effectiveness comparison of two gels in the treatment of sloughy leg ulcers. 5th European Conference on Advances in Wound Management; November 21‐24; Harrogate, UK. London: MacMillan Magazines, 1995:30.
Roldan 2010 {unpublished data only}
    1. Roldan A, Cuervo F. Efficacy of a polyhexanide/Betadine wound gel in the treatment of hard to heal wounds. Conference of the European Wound Management Association. EWMA Conference, 2010:129.
Romanelli 2009 {published data only}
    1. Romanelli M, Dini V, Bertone M. A pilot study evaluating the wound and skin care performances of the Hydration Response Technology dressing: a new concept of debridement. Journal of Wound Technology 2009;5(July):1‐3.
Sawyer 1979 {published data only}
    1. Sawyer PN, Haque S, Reddy M, Sopie MD, Feller J. Wound healing effects of Debrisan on varicose, postoperative, decubitus, and sickle‐cell ulcers in man. Vascular Surgery 1979;13:251‐6.
Stewart 1987 {published data only}
    1. Stewart AJ, Leaper DJ. Treatment of chronic leg ulcers in the community: a comparative trial of Scherisorb and Iodosorb. Phlebology 1987;2:115‐21.
Stromberg 1984 {published data only}
    1. Stromberg HE, Agren MS. Topical zinc oxide treatment improves arterial and venous leg ulcers. British Journal of Dermatology 1984;111:461‐8. - PubMed
Tarvainen 1988 {published data only}
    1. Tarvainen K. Cadexomer iodine (Iodosorb) compared with dextranomer (Debrisan) in the treatment of chronic leg ulcers. Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica (Supplementum) 1988;544:57‐9. - PubMed
Westerhof 1987 {published data only}
    1. Westerhof W, Jansen F, Wit F, Cormane R. Controlled double‐blind trial of fibrinolysin‐desoxyribonuclease (Elase) solution in patients with chronic leg ulcer who are treated before autologous skin grafting. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 1987;17:32‐9. - PubMed
Williams 2005 {published data only}
    1. Williams D, Enoch S, Miller D, Harris K, Price P, Harding K. Effect of sharp debridement using curette on recalcitrant nonhealing venous leg ulcers: a concurrently controlled, prospective cohort study. Wound Repair and Regeneration 2005;13:131‐7. - PubMed

References to studies awaiting assessment

Humbert 2013 {published data only}
    1. Humbert P, Faivre B, Veran Y, Debure C, Truchetet F, Becherel PA, et al. Protease‐modulating polyacrylate‐based hydrogel stimulates wound bed preparation in venous leg ulcers ‐ a randomized controlled trial. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology 2013;28(12):1742‐50. - PMC - PubMed
Meaume 2014 {published data only}
    1. Meaume S, Dissemond J, Addala A, Vanscheidt W, Stucker M, Goerge T, et al. Evaluation of two fibrous wound dressings for the management of leg ulcers: results of a European randomised controlled trial (EARTH RCT). Journal of Wound Care 2014;23(3):105‐16. - PubMed

Additional references

Ayello 2004a
    1. Ayello E, Baranoski S, Kerstein M, Cuddigan J. Wound Debridement. In: Baranoski S, Ayello E editor(s). Wound Care Essentials Practice Principles. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2004:117‐25.
Ayello 2004b
    1. Ayello E, Cuddigan J. Debridement: controlling the necrotic/cellular burden. Advances in Skin and Wound Care 2004;17(2):66‐75. - PubMed
Baharestani 1999
    1. Baharestani M. The clinical relevance of debridement. In: Baharestani M, Gottrup F, Holstein P, Vanscheidt W editor(s). The Clinical Relevance of Debridement. Springer Verlag, 1999:1‐15.
Blake 2007
    1. Blake FAS, Abromeit B, Bubenheim M, Li L, Schmelze R. The biosurgical wound debridement: experimental investigation of efficiency and practicability. Wound Repair and Regeneration 2007;15(5):756‐61. - PubMed
Bowers 2009
    1. Bowers K, Barrett S. Wound‐related pain: features, assessment and treatment. Nursing Standard 2009;24(10):47‐56. - PubMed
Brett 2003
    1. Brett D. A Historical Review of Topical Enzymatic Debridement. New York: McMahon Publishing, 2003.
Briggs 2012
    1. Briggs M, Nelson EA, Martyn‐St.James M. Topical agents or dressings for pain in venous leg ulcers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 11. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001177.pub3] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Callam 1987
    1. Callam MJ, Harper DR, Dale JJ, Ruckley C. Chronic ulcer of the leg: clinical history. BMJ 1987;294:1389‐91. - PMC - PubMed
Callam 1988
    1. Callam MJ, Harper DR, Dale JJ, Ruckley CV. Chronic leg ulceration: socio‐economic aspects. Scottish Medical Journal 1988;33:358‐60. - PubMed
Chan 2004
    1. Chan A, Hrobjartsson A, Haahr M, Gotzsche P, Altman D. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials. JAMA 2004;291(20):2457‐65. - PubMed
Clarke‐Moloney 2014
    1. Clarke‐Moloney M, Keane N, O'Connor V, Ryan MA, Meagher H, Grace P, et al. Randomised controlled trial comparing European standard class 1 to class 2 compression stockings for ulcer recurrence and patient compliance. International Wound Journal 2014;11(4):404‐8. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-481x.2012.01108.x] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Davies 2004
    1. Davies P. Current thinking on the management of necrotic and sloughy wounds. Professional Nurse 2004;19(10):34‐6. - PubMed
Dechartres 2013
    1. Dechartres A, Trinquart L, Bourton I, Ravaud P. Influence of trial sample size on treatment effect estimates: meta‐epidemiological study. BMJ 2013;346:1‐5. [DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f2304] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Dryburgh 2008
    1. Dryburgh N, Smith F, Donaldson J, Mitchell M. Debridement for surgical wounds. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006214] - DOI - PubMed
Edwards 2010
    1. Edwards J, Stapley S. Debridement of diabetic foot ulcers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003556.pub2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Eloy 1999
    1. Eloy R, Charton‐Picard I, Laux V, Zahn W. Evaluation of the activity of high‐dose collagenase in an experimental model of burn wound in the rat. In: Baharestani M, Gottrup F, Holstein P, Vanscheidt W editor(s). The Clinical Relevance of Debridement. Springer‐Verlag, 1999.
FDA 2006
    1. FDA. Food and Drug Administration: United States of America [Guidance of Industry Chronic Cutaneous Ulcer and Burn Wound ‐ developing Products for Treatment]. http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/index.htm 2006.
Ferreira‐Valente 2011
    1. Ferreira‐Valente MA, Pais‐Ribeiro JL, Jensen M. Validity of four pain intensity rating scales. Pain 2011;152:2399‐404. - PubMed
Gottrup 2011
    1. Gottrup F, Jorgensen B. Maggot debridement: an alternative method for debridement. Journal of Plastic Surgery July 2012;www.eplasty.com:290‐302.
Hahn 1999
    1. Hahn T, Dalsing M. In: Fahey V editor(s). Vascular Nursing. 3rd Edition. Pennysylvania: WB Saunders, 1999.
Higgins 2011
    1. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne J. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org. Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
Himel 1995
    1. Himel H. Wound healing: focus on the chronic wound. Wounds ‐ A Compendium of Clinical Research and Practice 1995;5(Supplement A):70A‐7A.
Leaper 2002
    1. Leaper D. Sharp technique for wound debridement. http://www.worldwidewounds.com/2002/december/Leaper/Sharp‐Debridement.html 2002.
Lefebvre 2011
    1. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J, on behalf of the Cochrane Information Retrieval Methods Group. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.
Lewis 2001
    1. Lewis R, Whiting P, ter Riet G, O'Meara S, Glanville J. A rapid and systematic review of the clinical effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness of debriding agents in treating surgical wounds healing by secondary intention. Health Technology Assessment 2001;5(14):1‐131. - PubMed
Margolis 2000
    1. Margolis D, Berlin J, Strom B. Which venous leg ulcers will heal with limb compression bandages?. American Journal of Medicine 2000;109(1):15‐9. - PubMed
Milic 2009
    1. Milic D, Zivic S, Bogdanovic D, Karanovic N, Golubovic Z. Risk factors related to the failure of venous leg ulcers to heal with compression treatment. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2009;49:1242‐7. - PubMed
Moffatt 2004
    1. Moffatt CJ, Franks PJ, Doherty DC, Martin R, Blewett R, Ross F. Prevalence of leg ulceration in a London population. Quarterly Journal of Medicine 2004;97:431‐7. - PubMed
Nelson 2006
    1. Nelson E, Harper D, Prescott R, Gibson B, Brown D, Ruckely C. Prevention of recurrence of venous ulceration: randomised controlled trial of class 2 and class 3 elastic compression. Journal Vascular Surgery 2006;44:803‐8. - PubMed
Nelzen 1996
    1. Nelzen O, Bergqvist D, Lindhagen A. The prevalence of chronic lower‐limb ulceration has been underestimated: results of a validated population questionnaire. British Journal of Surgery 1996;83:255‐8. - PubMed
NICE 2001
    1. NICE. National Institute of Clinical Excellence. Guidance on the use of debriding agents and specialist wound care clinics for difficult to heal surgical wounds. http://www.nice.org.uk/page.aspx?o=16585 2001.
O'Brien 2000
    1. O'Brien JF, Grace PA, Perry IJ, Burke PE, Grace PA, Perry IJ, et al. Prevalence and aetiology of leg ulcers in Ireland. Irish Journal of Medical Science 2000;169:110‐2. - PubMed
O'Meara 2012
    1. O'Meara S, Cullum N, Nelson EW, Dumville J. Compression for venous leg ulcers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 14 November 2012, Issue 11. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000265.pub3] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
RevMan 2012 [Computer program]
    1. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.2. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2012.
Rich 2003
    1. Rich A, McLachlan L. How living with a leg ulcer affects people's daily life: a nurse‐led study. Journal of Wound Care 2003;12(2):51‐4. - PubMed
Schultz 2003
    1. Schultz G, Sibbald G, Falanga V, Ayello E, Dowsett C, Harding K, et al. Wound bed preparation: a systematic approach to wound management. Wound Repair and Regeneration 2003;11:1‐28. - PubMed
Schulz 2010
    1. Schulz K, Altman D, Moher D for CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.. www.thelancet.com 2010; Vol. March.
Sen 2009
    1. Sen CK, Gordillo G, Roy S, Kirsner R, Lambert L, Hunt T, et al. Human skin wounds: a major and snowballing threat to public health and the economy. Wound Repair and Regeneration 2009;17(6):763‐71. - PMC - PubMed
Sieggreen 1997
    1. Sieggreen M, Malkebust J. Debridement: choices and challenges. Advances in Skin and Wound Care 1997;10(2):32‐7. - PubMed
SIGN 2009
    1. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN). Search filters. http://www.sign.ac.uk/methodology/filters.html#random (accessed 21 August 2009).
Sonnad 2012
    1. Sonnad S, Goldstack J, Mohr J, Whicher D. Effectiveness Guidance Document: methodological recommendations for comparative effectiveness research on the treatment of chronic wounds. http://www.cmtpnet.org/wp‐content/uploads/downloads/2012/10/wound0care‐2.... - PubMed
Strohal 2013
    1. Strohal R, Apelqvist J, Dissemond J, Jordan O'Brien J, Piaggesi A, Rimdeika R, et al. EWMA Document: debridement. Journal of Wound Care 2013;22(Supp (1)):S1‐S52. - PubMed
Thomas 1999
    1. Thomas S, Andrews A, Jones M, Church J. Maggots are useful in treating infected or chronic wounds. Lancet 1999;318:807‐8. - PMC - PubMed
Thomson 1996
    1. Thomson B, Hooper P, Powell R, Warin A. Four‐layer bandaging and healing rates of venous leg ulcers. Journal of Wound Care 1996;5(5):213‐6. - PubMed
Wolcott 2009
    1. Wolcott RD, Kennedy JP, Dowd SE. Regular debridement is the main tool for maintaining a healthy wound bed in most chronic wounds. Journal of Wound Care 2009;18(2):54‐6. - PubMed
Wolcott 2012
    1. Wolcott RD, Rumbaugh KP, James G, Schultz G, Philips P, Yang Q, et al. Biofilm maturity studies indicate sharp debridement opens a time‐dependent therapeutic window. Journal of Wound Care 2010;19(8):320‐8. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms