Monday 19 June 2023

  Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis (DISH)

    

                                  Dr. KS Dhillon


Introduction

Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) is also known as Forestier disease. It describes a phenomenon that is characterized by a tendency toward ossification of ligaments. It usually affects the spine [1,2].  Ossification of the longitudinal ligaments, especially the anterior ligaments, of the spine produces a tortuous paravertebral mass anterior to and distinct from the vertebral bodies (fig 1) [3]. When the thoracic anterior longitudinal ligament is ossified, the areas of ossification usually meet without fusion. Motion is actually possible, unlike lumbar vertebral bridging, which is associated with loss of lumbar motion. The zygapophyseal and sacroiliac joints are not involved in DISH. The intervening intervertebral disk space is preserved.

DISH is a phenomenon that is primarily age-related, rather than a disease. It is usually asymptomatic and is discovered incidentally on imaging studies taken for some other reason. Clinical manifestations, such as stiffness and back pain [4], may result from neuropathy or from physical impingement by bony overgrowth. 

There is no cure for DISH. Treatment is symptomatic and empirical. Surgery may be indicated to provide relief of severe symptoms, such as dysphagia or airway obstruction.


Fig 1 


Background

Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) was first described by Forestier and Rotes-Querol in 1948. They reported nine patients, ranging in age from 50 to 73 years, who suffered from spinal rigidity and had exuberant osteophytes on radiologic studies. The authors termed the condition as senile vertebral ankylosing hyperostosis [5].

DISH is well represented in the paleontologic and zoologic records. It is found in 1-3% of monkeys and baboons, as well as in gorillas, bears, horses, camels, bison, canids, musk oxen, felids, and whales [6,7,8,9,10, 11,12]. DISH was also present in dinosaurs [13,14,15]. It occurs in 15-25% of older mammals.


Pathophysiology

Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) is characterized by a tendency toward ossification of tendons, ligaments, and joint capsule insertions [16]. DISH is usually a completely asymptomatic phenomenon, with no alterations detectable on history taking or through physical examination.


Etiology

The causes of DISH are unknown. DISH results from calcification of entheses. Higher rates of DISH are seen with age over 50 years, in men compared with women, and in the White population compared with Black [4].  Additional risk factors include [17] :

  • Hypertension

  • Metabolic syndrome

  • Obesity

  • Type 2 diabetes mellitus

  • Hyperuricemia

A study by Lantsman et al [18] found that abdominal computed tomography showed significantly more visceral adipose tissue, as well as a significantly higher ratio of visceral to subcutaneous adipose tissue, in 43 patients with DISH as compared to 42 controls. The authors also noted that visceral adipose tissue is by itself associated with bone proliferation. They suggested that it is potentially a pathogenic pathway for enthesopathic excessive bone production in DISH.


Epidemiology

In the United States DISH is present in approximately 19% of men and 4% of women older than 50 years [19].

Mori et al [20] carried out a study of 3013 Japanese patients (1261 females and 1752 males) with a mean age of 65 years. The computed tomography based prevalence of thoracic DISH was 8.7%. The posterior longitudinal ligament of the cervical spine is ossified in 2% of Japanese people and in  0.16% of white people [21]. The anterior longitudinal ligament is calcified in 24% of patients who have posterior longitudinal ligament ossification [22].

In the Netherlands, DISH was reported in 17% of individuals [23]. A South African study of patients 40 years of age and older found that the prevalence of DISH in African blacks was 3.8% in men and 4.2% in women. The prevalence increased with increasing age, from 1% in the 40-49 year age group to 13.6% in those over 70 years of age [24].

DISH is present in approximately 19% of men over the age of 50 years but is found in only 4% of women in the same age group. It is uncommon in patients less than 50 years of age and is extremely rare in patients who are younger than 40 years.

A Finnish study [25] revealed the age frequency in Finnish men to be as follows:

40-49 years - 0.3%

50-59 years - 2.7%

60-69 years - 8.4%

70 years or older - 11.2%

The same study showed the age frequency in Finnish women to be as follows:

40-49 years - 0.2%

50-59 years - 1.7%

60-69 years - 4.3%

70 years or older - 6.9%

A study of middle-aged and elderly people in a rural town in Japan identified DISH in 17.5% of the 413 participants. The prevalence of DISH tends to increase with age, from 3.1% in individuals in their 50s to 14.0% in those in their 60s, 24.3% in those in their 70s, and 29.0% in those in their 80s. Besides aging, other independent factors associated with DISH were hypertension, male sex, and elevated body mass index [27].



Prognosis

Patients with DISH have an excellent prognosis. The condition is rarely life-threatening and it causes limited morbidity.

DISH does not appear to be a disease but it appears to be a phenomenon. A double-blind controlled evaluation in which controls and patients with DISH were drawn from the same population revealed no associated pathology. The incidence of arthritis, bursitis, and tendinitis is the same in patients with DISH and in controls. The character of back pain and duration is the same in patients with DISH and in controls. A history of back injury was found to be twice as frequent in control subjects as compared to patients with DISH. Back flexibility was also similar in the two groups.  Patients with DISH who had decreased lumbar spinal motion had a lower incidence of back pain, implying that DISH may have a protective effect [19,27].  One study has shown that DISH may be protective against back pain [28].

Another study showed that people with DISH were more likely to experience physical functional impairment. This included a 1.72-fold increased odds of self-reported difficulty in bending and worse grip strength [29].

A study by Yamada et al [30] involving 1063 patients treated surgically for lumbar spinal stenosis found that reoperations were more frequent in patients with DISH that extended to the lumbar segment. Twenty-two percent of such patients underwent reoperation as compared with 7.3% of patients without lumbar DISH. The authors were of the opinion that the unfavorable outcomes in patients with lumbar DISH may be due to the decreased number of mobile lumbar segments.

Excessive ligamentous calcification can impinge on other structures such as the esophagus. There are reports of stridor and dysphagia in patients with DISH [31,32]. When compression of the larynx occurs patients can develop vocal cord paresis and airway obstruction [33].

Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament can impinge on the spinal cord on rare occasions.

Reduced vertebral column flexibility that occurs with DISH predisposes to fractures of the vertebra. Sixty percent of the fractures occur in the cervical spine, 34.5% in the thoracic spine, and 5.5% in the lumbar spine. These fractures result from minor trauma, preoperative and postoperative positioning, or intraoperative maneuvers [3,34,35].  Besides fully ankylosed spines, partially ankylosed spines also are at risk, with fractures occurring adjacent to the fused regions [36]. The risk of fracture increases with the number of ankylosed vertebrae [37].  Obesity is an additional risk factor for fracture [38].  


Clinical Presentation

DISH is usually an asymptomatic phenomenon. It is usually discovered incidentally on imaging studies taken for some other reason.

Clinical manifestations, which may result from neuropathy or from physical impingement by bony overgrowth include [1] :

  • Acute monoarticular synovitis

  • Limited range of spinal motion

  • Polyarticular pain

  • Neck/thoracic/lumbar/extremity pain

  • Dysphagia [39]

  • Increased susceptibility to unstable spinal fractures

  • Airway obstruction of varying degrees

If vertebral fusion is quite extensive physical examination will show reduction in the range of spinal motion [40]. Since uniform vertebral involvement is extremely rare, usually there are no relatable findings.


Diagnostic Considerations

Other problems to consider in the differential diagnosis are:

  • Hypervitaminosis A

  • Retinoids

  • Pachydermoperiostosis

  • Spondylosis deformans

  • Fluorosis

  • Osteomalacia

  • Acromegaly

  • Hypophosphatemia

  • Hypoparathyroidism

  • Ossified posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL)

 


Differential Diagnoses

  • Ankylosing Spondylitis

  • Ankylosing Spondylitis and Undifferentiated Spondyloarthropathy


Laboratory Studies

No laboratory tests are needed. Studies have found that there is no difference between patients with vertebral hyperostosis and control patients for prevalence of diabetes mellitus, and plasma glucose [41,42].


Imaging Studies

DISH involves the thoracic vertebrae in 100% of cases, the lumbar vertebrae in 68-90%, and the cervical vertebrae in 65-78% of the cases. Ligamentous ossification affects both sides of the lumbar vertebral column. Generally, it tends to be unilateral in the human spine.

In the thoracic spine, DISH prominence is seen on the right lateral aspect. This is apparently related to aortic pulsations. The left-sided overgrowth is much reduced, also probably because of the influence of aortic pulsations. There is left-sided prominence in individuals with situs inversus.

The earliest sign of DISH appears to be new bone formation adjacent to the midportion of the vertebral body. Radiologically there is a dense line paralleling the longitudinal axis of the spine but separated by a clearly definable space.

The most commonly used diagnostic criteria for DISH are those set by Resnick and Niwayama [43,44]. The criteria include:

  • Calcification and ossification along the ventrolateral aspects of at least four contiguous vertebral bodies. There may or may not be localized pointed excrescences at intervening vertebral body–disk junctions.

  • Relative preservation of intervertebral disc height in the involved areas, with the absence of extensive radiographic changes of degenerative disc disease, including vacuum phenomena and vertebral body marginal sclerosis.

  • Absence of apophyseal joint bony ankylosis and sacroiliac joint sclerosis, erosion, or intra-articular bony fusion

Julkunen and colleagues [45] also suggested similar criteria as those from Resnick and Niwayama but also included the presence of bridges connecting two vertebral bodies in at least two sites on the thoracic spine. are as follows:

The ligamentous ossification phenomenon is not limited to the spine. Exuberant ossification at sites of tendon, ligamentous, or joint capsule insertion is suggestive of the diagnosis. Such ossification can occur at any site of ligament and perhaps tendon insertion. A study by Slonimsky et al [46] found pelvic enthesopathy on CT to be significantly more prevalent in patients with DISH compared with matched control patients. 

Entheseal reaction at the iliac crest and ischial tuberosities is referred to as pelvic whiskering. It is usually quite exuberant. Such whiskering has been noted in two-thirds of iliac crests studied and in 53% of ischial tuberosities. Entheseal reaction has been noted in 42% of lesser and 36% of greater trochanters of the femur. Enthesial spurs at the site of insertion of the quadriceps into the patella were present in 29% of patients studied. Osseous bridging of the tibia and fibula was noted in 10% of patients. Distal metacarpal and phalangeal capsular hyperostosis was present in 13% of patients with DISH [19].

DISH is associated with greater kyphosis in older men and women. DISH, however, is not significantly associated with a change in kyphosis over 4-5 years. In women followed over 15 years, those with DISH had less progression of kyphosis than those without DISH [47].

In patients with DISH who have experienced low-impact trauma,

whole spine computed tomography (CT) is mandatory. The rigid spinal structure resulting from DISH increases susceptibility to spinal fracture, and radiographs have low specificity for detecting those fractures.

Lantsman et al in their study of 147 patients with verified DISH who presented to the emergency department after low-energy trauma found that there were significantly more acute fractures on whole-spine CT than on radiographs [48].

The authors also found that in 57% of acute fractures, the site of tenderness was not indicative of the fractured spinal segment. Furthermore, two patients with tenderness at the site of one fracture also had asymptomatic distant fractures [48].


Histopathology

Histologic examination of vertebral specimens from patients with DISH shows partial or complete bone bridges. These bridges consist of cortical haversian bone, accompanied by morphological changes in the adjacent intervertebral disc [49]. Ossified tissues in DISH are composed of normal-appearing haversian bone [50].


Treatment

There is no cure for diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis. Treatment is symptomatic and empirical. The treatment includes the following [2] :

  • Anti-inflammatory drugs

  • Muscle relaxants

  • Physical therapy

  • Analgesics

  • Sedation

Breathing difficulty treated with nighttime continuous positive airway pressure therapy has been reported [51].

Surgery may be indicated in patients with severe symptoms, such as airway obstruction or dysphagia, that have not responded to conservative treatment [2]. Tracheotomy is the treatment of choice in most cases of DISH-related airway obstruction. Yosimatsu et al [52] reported a case of successful treatment of airway obstruction with careful airway management and surgical osteophytectomy [52].


Conclusion

DISH is a common disease that is usually asymptomatic and is characterized by new bone formation. The etiology remains unknown. In patients with DISH, there are extensive proliferative processes in the musculoskeletal system. DISH pathogenesis is polygenic. It is influenced by the interaction of many gene variants and environmental factors. There are potential disturbances in various genes with different chromosomal localizations and expressions. Molecular studies are required to clarify and verify the diagnostic criteria. Studying the molecular mechanisms involved in the formation of bone along with identifying the genetic markers associated with DISH, can help to discover the ossification pathogenesis of ligaments and tendon attachments. This could lead to targeted and effective therapies.



References

  1. Holgate RL, Steyn M. Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis: Diagnostic, clinical, and paleopathological considerations. Clin Anat. 2016 Mar 23.

  2. Nascimento FA, Gatto LA, Lages RO, Neto HM, Demartini Z, Koppe GL. Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis: A review. Surg Neurol Int. 2014. 5 (Suppl 3): S122-5.

  3. Westerveld LA, Verlaan JJ, Oner FC. Spinal fractures in patients with ankylosing spinal disorders: a systematic review of the literature on treatment, neurological status and complications. Eur Spine J. 2009 Feb. 18(2):145-56. 

  4. Luo TD, Varacallo M. Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis (DISH). 2020 Jan.

  5. Rotés-Querol J. Clinical manifestations of diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH). Br J Rheumatol. 1996 Dec. 35 (12):1193-4.

  6. Rothschild BM, Woods R. Old World spondylarthropathy: the gorilla connection. Arthritis Rheum. 1988 Jul. 31(7):934-5. 

  7. Ferigolo J. Estudos multidisciplinares. Goncalves de Araujo AJ, Ferreira LF, eds. Non-human Vertebrate Paleopathology. Brazil: Panorama; 1988. 213-34.

  8. Bjorkengren AG, Sartoris DJ, Shermis S, et al. Patterns of paravertebral ossification in the prehistoric saber-toothed cat. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1987 Apr. 148(4):779-82. 

  9. McDonald JN, Bartlett CS Jr. An associated musk ox skeleton from Saltville, Virginia. J Vert Paleontol. 1983. 2:453-470.

  10. Moodie RL. Studies in Paleopathology: XX. Vertebral lesions in the sabre-tooth, Pleistocene of California, resembling the so-called Myositis Ossificans Progressiva, compared with certain ossifications in the dinosaurs. Ann Med Hist. 1927. 9:91-102.

  11. Rothschild BM. Scientifically rigorous reptile and amphibian osseous pathology: Lessons for forensic herpetology from comparative and paleo-pathology. Applied Herpetology. 2008. 10:39-116.

  12. Rothschild BM. Skeletal paleopathology of rheumatic diseases: the subprimate connection. McCarty DJ, ed. Arthritis and Allied Conditions. 11th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Lea and Febiger; 1989. 3-7.

  13. Rothschild BM. Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis as reflected in the paleontologic record: dinosaurs and early mammals. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 1987 Nov. 17(2):119-25. 

  14. Rothschild BM, Berman D. Fusion of caudal vertebrae in late Jurassic sauropods. J Vert Paleontol. 1991. 11(1):29-36.

  15. Rothschild BM, Martin LD. Paleopathology: Disease in the Fossil Record. Boca Raton, Fla: CRC Press;. 1993.

  16. Fornasier VL, Littlejohn G, Urowitz MB, et al. Spinal entheseal new bone formation: the early changes of spinal diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis. J Rheumatol. 1983 Dec. 10(6):939-47.

  17. Merkel PA. Rheumatic Disease and Endocrinopathies. Klippel JH, Stone JH, Crofford LJ, White PH, eds. Primer on the Rheumatic Diseases. 13th ed. New York: Springer; 2008. 479-83.

  18. Dan Lantsman C, Herman A, Verlaan JJ, Stern M, Mader R, Eshed I. Abdominal fat distribution in diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis and ankylosing spondylitis patients compared to controls. Clin Radiol. 2018 Oct. 73 (10):910.e15-910.e20.

  19. Rothschild BM. Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH): misconceptions and reality. Clin Rheumatol. 1985. 4:207-12.

  20. Mori K, Kasahara T, Mimura T, Nishizawa K, Nakamura A, Imai S. Prevalence of thoracic diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) in Japanese: Results of chest CT-based cross-sectional study. J Orthop Sci. 2017 Jan. 22 (1):38-42.

  21. Ono M, Russell WJ, Kudo S, et al. Ossification of the thoracic posterior longitudinal ligament in a fixed population. Radiological and neurological manifestations. Radiology. 1982 May. 143(2):469-74. 

  22. Tsuyama N. Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament of the spine. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1984 Apr. 71-84. 

  23. Westerveld LA, van Ufford HM, Verlaan JJ, Oner FC. The prevalence of diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis in an outpatient population in the Netherlands. J Rheumatol. 2008 Aug. 35(8):1635-8. 

  24. Cassim B, Mody GM, Rubin DL. The prevalence of diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis in African blacks. Br J Rheumatol. 1990 Apr. 29 (2):131-2.

  25. Julkunen H, Knekt P, Aromaa A. Spondylosis deformans and diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) in Finland. Scand J Rheumatol. 1981. 10(3):193-203.

  26. Uehara M, Takahashi J, Ikegami S, Tokida R, Nishimura H, Sakai N, et al. Prevalence of Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis in the General Elderly Population: A Japanese Cohort Survey Randomly Sampled From a Basic Resident Registry. Clin Spine Surg. 2020 Apr. 33 (3):123-127.

  27. Schlapbach P, Beyeler C, Gerber NJ, et al. Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) of the spine: a cause of back pain? A controlled study. Br J Rheumatol. 1989 Aug. 28(4):299-303.

  28. Holton KF, Denard PJ, Yoo JU, Kado DM, Barrett-Connor E, Marshall LM. Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis and Its Relation to Back Pain Among Older Men: The MrOS Study. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2011 Mar 3.

  29. Katzman WB, Huang MH, Kritz-Silverstein D, Barrett-Connor E, Kado DM. Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis (DISH) and Impaired Physical Function: The Rancho Bernardo Study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2017 Jul. 65 (7):1476-1481.

  30. Yamada K, Satoh S, Abe Y, Yanagibashi Y, Hyakumachi T, Masuda T. Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis Extended to the Lumbar Segment Is a Risk Factor of Reoperation in Patients Treated Surgically for Lumbar Stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018 Oct 15. 43 (20):1446-1453.

  31. Seidler TO, Pèrez Ă€lvarez JC, Wonneberger K, Hacki T. Dysphagia caused by ventral osteophytes of the cervical spine: clinical and radiographic findings. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2008 Jun 28. 

  32. Burduk PK, Wierzchowska M, Grzelalak L, Dalke K, Mierzwinski J. Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis inducted stridor and dysphagia. Otolaryngol Pol. 2008. 62(2):138-40. 

  33. Kosmidou P, Karamatzanis I, Angelis S, Anagiotos A, Aspris A. Cervical Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis: Rare Cause of Emergency Tracheostomy. Cureus. 2022 Jan. 14 (1):e20925.

  34. Israel Z, Mosheiff R, Gross E, Muggia-Sullam M, Floman Y. Hyperextension fracture-dislocation of the thoracic spine with paraplegia in a patient with diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis. J Spinal Disord. 1994 Oct. 7(5):455-7.

  35. Königshausen M, Dudda M, Merle C, Schildhauer TA, Fehmer T. Thoracic vertebral body fracture after total hip replacement in diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis. Orthopedics. 2012 Jun. 35(6):e1000-4. 

  36. Paley D, Schwartz M, Cooper P, Harris WR, Levine AM. Fractures of the spine in diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991 Jun. 22-32. 

  37. Hendrix RW, Melany M, Miller F, Rogers LF. Fracture of the spine in patients with ankylosis due to diffuse skeletal hyperostosis: clinical and imaging findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994 Apr. 162(4):899-904.

  38. Matejka J. [Hyperextension injuries of the thoracolumbar spine]. Zentralbl Chir. 2006 Feb. 131(1):75-9.

  39. Kaffel D, Kchir H. Dysphagia related to diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISHphagia). Clin Case Rep. 2019 Nov. 7 (11):2265-2266.

  40. Olivieri I, D'Angelo S, Cutro MS, Padula A, Peruz G, Montaruli M, et al. Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis may give the typical postural abnormalities of advanced ankylosing spondylitis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2007 Nov. 46(11):1709-11. 

  41. Mader R, Novofestovski I, Adawi M, Lavi I. Metabolic Syndrome and Cardiovascular Risk in Patients with Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2008 Feb 25. 

  42. Daragon A, Mejjad O, Czernichow P, et al. Vertebral hyperostosis and diabetes mellitus: a case-control study. Ann Rheum Dis. 1995 May. 54(5):375-8.

  43. Resnick D, Niwayama G. Diagnosis of Bone and Joint Disorders. 2nd ed. Philadelphia PA: WB Saunders; 1563-615.

  44. Oudkerk SF, de Jong PA, Attrach M, Luijkx T, Buckens CF, Mali WP, et al. Diagnosis of diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis with chest computed tomography: inter-observer agreement. Eur Radiol. 2017 Jan. 27 (1):188-194.

  45. Yunoki M, Suzuki K, Uneda A, Okubo S, Hirashita K, Yoshino K. The Importance of Recognizing Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis for Neurosurgeons: A Review. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2016 Mar 28.

  46. Slonimsky E, Leibushor N, Aharoni D, Lidar M, Eshed I. Pelvic enthesopathy on CT is significantly more prevalent in patients with diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) compared with matched control patients. Clin Rheumatol. 2016 Jul. 35 (7):1823-7.

  47. Katzman WB, Parimi N, Mansoori Z, Nardo L, Kado DM, Cawthon PM, et al. Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Associations of Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis and Thoracic Kyphosis in Older Men and Women. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2017 Aug. 69 (8): 1245-1252.

  48. Lantsman CD, Barkay G, Friedlander A, Barbi M, Stern M, Eshed I. Whole Spine CT Scan for the Detection of Acute Spinal Fractures in Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis Patients Who Sustained Low-energy Trauma. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020 Apr 23.

  49. Kuperus JS, Westerveld LA, Rutges JA, Alblas J, van Rijen MH, Bleys RL, et al. Histological characteristics of diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis. J Orthop Res. 2016 Apr 21. 

  50. Seawright AA, English PB, Gartner RJ. Hypervitaminosis A and hyperostosis of the cat. Nature. 1965 Jun 12. 206(989):1171-2.

  51. Dell'Era V, Garzaro M, Farri F, Gorris C, Rosa MS, Toso A, et al. Respiratory presentation of diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH): Management and review of the literature. Cranio. 2022 Jan. 40 (1):88-91.

  52. Yoshimatsu Y, Tobino K, Maeda K, Kubota K, Haruta Y, Adachi H, et al. Management of Airway Obstruction due to Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis in the Cervical Spine: A Case Report and Literature Review. Intern Med. 2018 Aug 24.

Monday 5 June 2023

 

                Diabetic Foot Ulcers



                                 Dr. KS Dhillon



Introduction

Foot ulcers are among the most common complications in patients who have diabetes mellitus which is not well controlled. The ulcers are the result of poor glycemic control, underlying neuropathy, peripheral vascular disease, or poor foot care. The ulcers are also one of the common causes of osteomyelitis of the foot and amputation of the lower extremities. These ulcers usually occur in the areas of the foot which encounter repetitive trauma and pressure [1]. Staphylococcus is the most common infective organism. The disease is typically chronic. It is commonly encountered in both the outpatient and inpatient settings. 

Diabetic foot ulcers are responsible for more admissions than any other complication in diabetic patients. Diabetes is the leading cause of non-traumatic amputations in the USA. About 5% of patients with diabetes develop foot ulcers and 1% end up with an amputation.

Patient education about the complication and the need for proper medical care will reduce the risk of complications.


Etiology

The etiology of diabetic foot ulcers is multifactorial. The common underlying causes include poor glycemic control, callosities, ill-fitting footwear, foot deformities, improper foot care, underlying peripheral neuropathy, dry skin, and poor circulation.

Neuropathy which eventually leads to a foot ulcer develops in about 60% of diabetics. The risk of a foot ulcer is higher in individuals with a flat foot because they have disproportionate stress across the foot, leading to tissue inflammation in high-risk areas of the foot.


Epidemiology

Foot ulcers develop in 9.1 million to 26.1 million people with diabetes

worldwide [2]. Fifteen to twenty-five percent of patients with diabetes mellitus will develop a diabetic foot ulcer during their lifetime [3]. The number of newly diagnosed diabetics is increasing yearly, and the incidence of diabetic foot ulcers is bound to increase as well.

Diabetic foot ulcers are most prevalent in patients with diabetes mellitus after the age of 45 years.  


Pathophysiology

The development of a diabetic ulcer usually occurs in 3 stages. The first stage is the development of a callus due to neuropathy. Motor neuropathy produces physical deformity of the foot, and sensory neuropathy causes sensory loss that leads to ongoing trauma. Drying of the skin because of autonomic neuropathy produces drying of the skin which is also another contributing factor. Frequent trauma to the callosity results in subcutaneous hemorrhage and it eventually erodes and becomes an ulcer [2].

Patients with diabetes also develop severe atherosclerosis of the small blood vessels in the legs and feet, leading to vascular compromise. The vascular compromise is another cause of diabetic foot infections. Failure of the blood to reach the wound delays wound healing and it eventually leads to necrosis and gangrene.


History and Physical Examination

Taking a good history is important. The history should include the duration of diabetes, glycemic control, other pre-existing complications of diabetes including sensory neuropathy, history of peripheral vascular disease, callus, previous ulcer, prior treatment, and the outcome. The history should also include information regarding the foot and footwear. 

During the clinical examination, the peripheral pulses of the feet must be felt and anatomical anomalies looked for. Also looked for is the presence of callus and signs of vascular insufficiency. There may be loss of hair, and muscle atrophy. The presence of purulence, scabs, and evidence of neuropathy are looked for.

Features that indicate neuropathy include:

Dysesthesia

Anhydrosis

Paresthesia

Hypo or hyperesthesia

Ulcers are usually seen in the weight-bearing areas of the foot such as the plantar metatarsal head, tips of hammer toes, heel, and other prominent areas. Other physical features include brittle nails, calluses, and fissures.


Evaluation

The most common laboratory investigations done in patients with ulcers include a fasting blood sugar, complete metabolic panel, a complete blood count, glycated hemoglobin levels, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP). 

Recent literature and guidelines suggest that in patients with diabetic foot ulcers, results of specimens for culture taken by swabbing do not correlate well with those obtained by deep tissue sampling. This means that superficial swab specimens may be less reliable for guiding antimicrobial therapy as compared to deep tissue specimens [3].

X-rays are taken to look for underlying osteomyelitis and underlying fractures, the presence of air in the subcutaneous tissue, and the presence of foreign body. An MRI is the preferred test if osteomyelitis is suspected. A bone scan with technetium can also be used to diagnose osteomyelitis. Arterial Doppler with ankle-brachial index (ABI) is useful for diagnosing underlying peripheral vascular disease.

The probe-to-bone test (PTB) is performed by probing the ulcer with a sterile metal probe. It can help with the diagnosis of underlying osteomyelitis. If the probe hits the bone, it is a positive test [4]. Positive probe-to-bone test results are useful especially when conducted on patients with diabetes mellitus [5].


Treatment

Treatment of diabetic foot ulcers should be systematic. There is a need to identify if there is any evidence of ongoing infection. A history of chills and fever, in the presence of pain, warmth, erythema, or induration of the ulcer would indicate the presence of infection. Even in the presence of severe diabetic foot infection, there can be minimal systemic signs of infection [6]. 

A decision has to be made whether the ulcer should be managed in the outpatient setting or inpatient setting. Hospitalization would be needed if parenteral antibiotics are required and there are concerns of noncompliance, inability to care for the wound, and ability to offload pressure [7]. Both categories of patients would require treatment with antibiotics.

Organisms that are commonly seen in diabetic foot ulcers include Staphylococcus aureus (Staph aureus), Streptococcus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and rarely E. coli. Diabetes patients have a high carriage rate of Staph aureus in the nose and skin, and this increases the chances of infection of the ulcer [8]. Antibiotics are only used if there is an infection in the ulcer. The dose, duration, and type of antibiotic will depend on the severity of the infection.

Outpatients with diabetic ulcers are usually treated with oral cephalosporins or augmentin. If MRSA is suspected, then the patients are treated with linezolid, clindamycin, or cephalexin plus doxycycline or a trimethoprim sulphamethoxazole combination (bactrim). 

Inpatients are treated with parenteral antibiotics. Drugs used include piperacillin-tazobactam (zosyn), and augmentin. If the patient has penicillin allergy, then carbapenems including ertapenem or meropenem are used. Other combinations include adding metronidazole for anaerobic coverage along with quinolones like ciprofloxacin or levofloxacin, or with cephalosporins such as ceftriaxone, cefepime, or ceftazidime. For MRSA intravenous vancomycin, linezolid, or daptomycin can be used [9].

Besides the use of antibiotics in the treatment of diabetic ulcers any

underlying peripheral vascular disease must be treated to improve the blood flow to the ulcers. Poor blood supply limits the oxygen supply and the delivery of antibiotics to the ulcer. Hence, revascularization improves both and there is a better chance of ulcer healing.

The next step is to perform local debridement or removal of calluses. 

If the patient has Charcots foot, then the initial treatment is immobilization with braces or special shoes. Most patients will require a surgical procedure such as arthrodesis or an osteotomy.


Efforts must be made to prevent new ulcers and worsening of the existing ulcer. This can be achieved by offloading the pressure from the site by using walkers or therapeutic shoes [10]. If the wound fails to heal in 30 days, then hyperbaric oxygen therapy can be used. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy improves wound healing and also reduces the rate of complications [11].


Differential Diagnosis

The differential diagnosis includes:

  • Squamous cell carcinoma

  • Superficial thrombophlebitis

  • Synergistic gangrene

  • Blunt bone trauma

  • Bone tumour

  • Gas gangrene

  • Lyme arthritis

  • Osteomyelitis

  • Sarcoid arthritis

  • Sickle cell crisis


Staging

One of the commonly used classification for ulcers is the one by Wagner. The classification grades wounds into six grades based on the depth [12].


Grade/ Features


Grade 1-- Superficial ulcer


Grade 2-- Deep ulcer involving tendon bone or joint


Grade 3-- Deep ulcer with abscess or osteomyelitis


Grade 4 -- Gangrene involving the forefoot


Grade 5 -- Gangrene involving the entire Foot


This classification has been criticized for only incorporating ulcer depth and not incorporating other factors known to influence the outcome. One of the most commonly used classification is The University of Texas Classification, which includes an assessment of the depth, the type of infection, and ischemia based on the eventual outcome of the wound [13].


Prognosis

With early detection and appropriate treatment, the prognosis is good. Delay in treatment can have detrimental effects which can lead to amputation of the foot. Patients with chronic diabetic ulcers have a high risk of rehospitalization and prolonged hospitalization.


Complications

The complications include gangrene of the foot, osteomyelitis, amputation of the limb, permanent deformity, and risk of sepsis.


Postoperative Care

Patients who have an amputation will need comprehensive therapy that includes physical therapy, occupational therapy, and they will also need a prosthesis.


Conclusion

Diabetes has a significant number of life-threatening complications. One of them is a foot ulcer. Many patients with diabetes mellitus with a foot ulcer have peripheral vascular disease and neuropathy. 

Many patients with diabetes mellitus with a foot ulcer end up with amputations. The amputation makes them disabled. The key to preventing foot ulcers is education. The primary care provider should educate the patient on the harms of smoking and the need for better control of blood glucose. Patients with diabetes mellitus also need to be taught about proper shoe wear, podiatric care, and control of hyperlipidemia. There is a need to educate the patient and family on preventative measures to minimize morbidity and improve outcomes. 


The dietitian can educate the patient on a healthy diet. During clinic visits, the feet must be examined for skin integrity, pulses, and sensation. Diabetic patients should be told that anytime they have an open wound, they should seek immediate care and avoid homemade remedies. 

Loss of a limb leads to enormous morbidity. Many patients are not able to afford a prosthesis. Most remain disabled for life and have a poor quality of life.


References

  1. Singer AJ, Tassiopoulos A, Kirsner RS. Evaluation and Management of Lower-Extremity Ulcers. N Engl J Med. 2018 Jan 18;378(3): 302-303.

  2. Armstrong DG, Boulton AJM, Bus SA. Diabetic Foot Ulcers and Their Recurrence. N Engl J Med. 2017 Jun 15;376(24):2367-2375.

  3. Mutluoglu M, Uzun G, Turhan V, Gorenek L, Ay H, Lipsky BA. How reliable are cultures of specimens from superficial swabs compared with those of deep tissue in patients with diabetic foot ulcers? J Diabetes Complications. 2012 May-Jun;26(3):225-9.

  4. Malhotra R, Chan CS, Nather A. Osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot. Diabet Foot Ankle. 2014;5. 

  5. Mutluoglu M, Uzun G, Sildiroglu O, Turhan V, Mutlu H, Yildiz S. Performance of the probe-to-bone test in a population suspected of having osteomyelitis of the foot in diabetes. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2012 Sep-Oct;102(5):369-73.

  6. Eneroth M, Apelqvist J, Stenström A. Clinical characteristics and outcome in 223 diabetic patients with deep foot infections. Foot Ankle Int. 1997 Nov;18(11):716-22.

  7. Lipsky BA, Pecoraro RE, Larson SA, Hanley ME, Ahroni JH. Outpatient management of uncomplicated lower-extremity infections in diabetic patients. Arch Intern Med. 1990 Apr;150(4):790-7. 

  8. Breen JD, Karchmer AW. Staphylococcus aureus infections in diabetic patients. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 1995 Mar;9(1):11-24.

  9. Lipsky BA, Berendt AR, Cornia PB, Pile JC, Peters EJ, Armstrong DG, Deery HG, Embil JM, Joseph WS, Karchmer AW, Pinzur MS, Senneville E., Infectious Diseases Society of America. 2012 Infectious Diseases Society of America clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2012 Jun;54(12):e132-73.

  10. Jeffcoate WJ, Harding KG. Diabetic foot ulcers. Lancet. 2003 May 03;361(9368):1545-51.

  11. Hanley ME, Manna B. StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing; Treasure Island (FL): Jul 18, 2022. Hyperbaric Treatment Of Diabetic Foot Ulcer.

  12. Wagner FW. The dysvascular foot: a system for diagnosis and treatment. Foot Ankle. 1981 Sep;2(2):64-122. 

  13. Armstrong DG, Lavery LA, Harkless LB. Validation of a diabetic wound classification system. The contribution of depth, infection, and ischemia to risk of amputation. Diabetes Care. 1998 May;21(5):855-9.