Meta-Analysis on the Efficacy and Safety of Platelet-Derived Growth Factor in Diabetic Foot Wound Healing

Yunfan Zhang

doi:10.18282/po4680

Yunfan Zhang ^* Chongming hospital affiliated to Shanghai university of medicine and health sciences

Article ID: 4680

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18282/po4680

Abstract

Abstract

Background: Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are a major complication of diabetes mellitus, posing significant challenges to wound healing and increasing the risk of lower limb amputations. Platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) has shown potential as a therapeutic agent for DFUs due to its role in promoting cellular proliferation, angiogenesis, and tissue repair. However, the efficacy and safety of PDGF remain controversial, with mixed results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Objective: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of recombinant human platelet-derived growth factor (rhPDGF) in the treatment of DFUs, focusing on clinical outcomes such as healing rates, recurrence rates, healing time, and adverse event (AE) rates.

Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted across six databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, and WeiPu) to identify RCTs evaluating rhPDGF in DFU treatment. Inclusion criteria adhered to the PICOS framework. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two researchers. Meta-analysis was conducted using R software, with heterogeneity assessed via the I² statistic. Subgroup, sensitivity, and publication bias analyses were also performed.

Results: A total of 12 RCTs, involving 26,469 participants, were included. The meta-analysis demonstrated that rhPDGF significantly improved healing rates compared to control interventions (OR = 1.76, 95% CI: 1.37–2.27, P < 0.01). Subgroup analysis revealed that the 100 μg/g rhPDGF concentration was more

effective than 30 μg/g. No significant differences were found in recurrence rates (OR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.36–1.17, P = 0.15), healing time (SMD = -0.46, 95% CI: -1.16–0.23, P = 0.19), or adverse event rates (OR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.61–1.17, P = 0.30). Sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of the results, and no publication bias was detected.

Conclusions: This meta-analysis provides robust evidence that rhPDGF, particularly at a concentration of 100 μg/g.