Methods: Our objective was to assess the utility of specific inflammatory markers (WBC, CRP, ESR and NLR) in discriminating between various stages of DFI. We performed a retrospective chart review of 380 adult patients admitted to Banner-University Medical Centers in Tucson AZ, between January 2013 and December 2013 for diabetic foot complications. The primary outcomes were a healed diabetic foot, a non-infected foot ulcer, an infected diabetic foot only involving soft tissue, and a diabetic foot infection involving bone (osteomyelitis).
Results: There was no relationship between clinical diagnosis and CRP (P = 0.27), between clinical diagnosis and ESR (P = 0.15) or between clinical diagnosis and NLR at follow up (P = 0.15). However, there was significant relationship between clinical diagnosis and WBC at follow up (P = 0.045).
Conclusion: Our study calls into question the utility of measuring and trending CRP, ESR, and NLR in patients with DFI. Instead, a cheaper and more accessible marker, WBC, is more useful in assessing the severity of the diabetic foot at follow up.
M. Salloum, None
S. Gardner, None
N. Giovinco, None
D. Armstrong, None
D. Nix, None
M. Al Mohajer, None
See more of: Poster Abstract Session