↓ Skip to main content

Negative pressure wound therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers may be mediated through differential gene expression

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Diabetologica, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 Mendeley
Title
Negative pressure wound therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers may be mediated through differential gene expression
Published in
Acta Diabetologica, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00592-018-1223-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

S. Borys, A. H. Ludwig-Slomczynska, M. Seweryn, J. Hohendorff, T. Koblik, J. Machlowska, B. Kiec-Wilk, P. Wolkow, Maciej T. Malecki

Abstract

Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been successfully used as a treatment for diabetic foot ulceration (DFU). Its mechanism of action on the molecular level, however, is not fully understood. We assessed the effect of NPWT on gene expression in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and DFU. We included two cohorts of patients-individuals treated with either NPWT or standard therapy. The assignment to NWPT was non-randomized and based on wound characteristics. Differential gene expression profiling was performed using Illumina gene expression arrays and R Bioconductor pipelines based on the 'limma' package. The final cohort encompassed 21 patients treated with NPWT and 8 with standard therapy. The groups were similar in terms of age (69.0 versus 67.5 years) and duration of T2DM (14.5 versus 14.4 years). We identified four genes differentially expressed between the two study arms post-treatment, but not pre-treatment: GFRA2 (GDNF family receptor alpha-2), C1QBP (complement C1q binding protein), RAB35 (member of RAS oncogene family) and SYNJ1 (synaptic inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate 5-phosphatase 1). Interestingly, all four genes seemed to be functionally involved in wound healing by influencing re-epithelialization and angiogenesis. Subsequently, we utilized co-expression analysis in publicly available RNA-seq data to reveal the molecular functions of GFRA2 and C1QBP, which appeared to be through direct protein-protein interactions. We found initial evidence that the NPWT effect on DFUs may be mediated through differential gene expression. A discovery of the specific molecular mechanisms of NPWT is potentially valuable for its clinical application and development of new therapies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 135 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 11%
Researcher 11 8%
Student > Master 9 7%
Other 6 4%
Student > Postgraduate 6 4%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 74 55%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 24 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Social Sciences 3 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Other 7 5%
Unknown 76 56%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 April 2019.
All research outputs
#15,545,785
of 23,103,903 outputs
Outputs from Acta Diabetologica
#557
of 932 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,517
of 341,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Diabetologica
#15
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,903 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 932 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,518 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.