Share this article

Retrospective case series: Management of diabetic foot ulcers using Prontosan®

Marco Romanelli, Yan Liu, Michelle Gibb, Somboon Jermsujarit, Chinnawut Sutsawong, Martha Camille Dollete, Charles Richard R. Cabuquit, Bianca Criselda M. Carilo, Mandika Wijeyaratne, Dilki Liyanage, Vinula Gunawardena, Navanesan Gowcikan, Nagenthiram Harivallavan, Damitha Fonseka, Jirapa Khawyai, Enoka Wijeratne, Poovasit Klinoubol, Thushan Gooneratne, Yafei Zhao
12 June 2025

Diabetic foot ulceration is a preventable complication of diabetes. It is reported that people living with diabetes have up to a 40% risk of undergoing a lower-extremity amputation, while the lifetime risk of developing a diabetic foot ulcer is around 25% (Jogheea-Jutton et al, 2022). If left untreated, or not treated appropriately, diabetic foot ulcers may lead to amputation and increased disability, with poor outcomes and significant implications for the individual, their family and carers, the community and health systems (Nair et al, 2020; Jogheea-Jutton et al, 2022).

In response to this growing challenge, B. Braun launched the Excellence Case Sharing Award in April 2023, inviting independent healthcare professionals from the Asia-Pacific region to share their expertise in diabetic foot ulcer management. The theme for the award, ‘Management of Diabetic Foot Ulcers: UndeFEETed’ sought to highlight innovative, person-centred approaches and cost-effective practices aimed at improving wound outcomes. The award encouraged healthcare professionals to submit abstracts focused on preventing infection, promoting healing, preserving quality of life and achieving cost-effective savings in the management of diabetic foot ulcers. 

A distinguished panel of independent experts; Professor Marco Romanelli, Professor Yan Liu and Michelle Gibb (PhD) reviewed the submitted abstracts and selected the winners and finalists. Their decisions were made independently, without any affiliation to B. Braun, ensuring an unbiased evaluation process.

This case series supplement features 10 clinical assessments of the Prontosan® product range, used in various types of diabetic foot ulcers for cleansing and wound bed preparation. The cases span a wide spectrum. Many of the wounds presented in this case series were infected and several patients were at risk of amputation when they initially presented for treatment. However, following the introduction of a new cleansing protocol using the Prontosan® product range, all wounds showed good progress towards healing or achieved complete healing.

Prof Marco Romanelli, Prof Yan Liu and Dr Michelle Gibb (PhD)

Download the PDF to access the full case study series

Disclaimer: This case series report has been supported by an educational grant from B Braun. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of B. Braun.
References

Andriessen AE, Eberlein T (2008) Assessment of a wound cleansing solution in the treatment of problem wounds. Wounds 20(6): 171-5

Bjarnsholt T, Eberlein T, Malone M (2017) Management of wound biofilm: update. J Wound Care 26(2): 57–68

Cooper DM, Bojke C, Ghosh P (2023) Cost-Effectiveness of PHMB & betaine wound bed preparation compared with standard care in venous leg ulcers: A cost-utility analysis in the United Kingdom. J Tissue Viability 32(2): 262-9

Cruz AF, Amoroso AE, Tanque AA (2024) The Economic Impact of Care & Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers at a Tertiary Government Hospital in the Philippines: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Dinkum Journal of Medical Innovations 3(07): 510–22

Davis SC, Harding A, Gil J et al (2017) Effectiveness of a polyhexanide irrigation solution on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus biofilms in a porcine wound model. Int Wound J 14(4): 640–648

Durantecm, Greco A, Sidoli O et al (2014) Evaluation of the effectiveness of a polyhexanide and propyl betaine-based gel in the treatment of chronic wounds. Minerva Chir 69(5): 283–92

Gansen F, Hepworth C, Richardson S et al (2024) EE54 Polihexanide and Betaine (PSGX) Containing Solution Versus Saline for the Treatment of Leg Ulcers: A Comparative Cost Analysis Using Real-World Data From England. Value in Health 27(12): 63–64

Gist S, Tio-Matos I, Falzgraf S et al (2009) Wound care in the geriatric client. Clinical Interventions in Aging 4: 269–87

Hirsch T, Koerber A, Jacobsen F et al (2010) Evaluation of toxic side effects of clinically used skin antiseptics in vitro. Journal of Surgical Research 164(2): 344–50

Kaehn K (2010) Polihexanide: a safe and highly effective biocide. Skin Pharmacology and Physiology 23: 7–16

Lu Q, Wang J, Wei X et al (2020) Cost of Diabetic Foot Ulcer Management in China: A 7-Year Single-Center Retrospective Review. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes 13: 4249-4260

Malone M, Bjarnsholt T, McBain AJ et al (2017) The prevalence of biofilms in chronic wounds: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published data. J Wound Care 26(1): 20–25

Mehl AA, Lopes Mensor L, Frassi Bastos D et al (2013) Cost-effectiveness of polyhexamethylen biguanide 0.1 % and betaine 0.1 % solution (Prontosan®) versus saline for cleansing of chronic wounds under the Brazilian Private Health System perspective. J Bras Econ Saúde 5(3): 135–46

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2021) Medical technology consultation document. [Online] Available at: Medical technology consultation document Prontosan for acute and chronic wounds How medical technology guidance supports innovation

Phillips PL, Wolcott RD, Fletcher J, Schultz GS (2010) Biofilms Made Easy. Wounds International 1(3)

Ricci E (2018) Cleansing versus tailored deep debridement: a fresh approach to wound cleansing. J Wound Care 27(8): 512–18

Seipp HM, Hofmann S, Hack A et al (2005) Efficacy of various wound irrigation solutions against biofilms. ZfW 4(5): 160–168

Suh J, Ghosh P (2020) PIN8 Analysis of Potential Cost- Savings after Introduction of 0.1% Polihexanide/ Betaine Solution for Chronic Wounds in Reimbursement Healthcare System of Korea. Value in Health Regional Issues 22: 49

To E, Dyck R, Gerber S et al (2016) The effectiveness of topical polyhexamethylene biguanide (PHMB) agents for the treatment of chronic wounds: a systematic review. Surgical Technology International 29: 45–51

Free for all healthcare professionals

Sign up to the Wounds Group journals





By clicking ‘Subscribe’, you are agreeing that the Wounds Group are able to email you periodic newsletters. You may unsubscribe from these at any time. Your info is safe with us and we will never sell or trade your details. For information please review our privacy policy.

Share this article

Are you a healthcare professional? This website is for healthcare professionals only. To continue, please confirm that you are a healthcare professional below.

We use cookies responsibly to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your browser settings, we’ll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on this website. Read about how we use cookies.

I am not a healthcare professional.