LITERATURE REVIEWElectric Stimulation as an Effective Adjunctive Therapy for Diabetic Foot Ulcer: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled TrialsChen, Zong BS; Chen, Zhi-You BS; Liu, Wen-Hui MD; Li, Guang-Shuai MD, PhDAuthor Information In the Department of Plastic Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, in Zhengzhou, China, Zong Chen, BS, and Zhi-You Chen, BS, are postgraduate students; Wen-Hui Liu, MD, is Assistant Professor; and Guang-Shuai Li, MD, PhD, is Professor. Acknowledgment: This work was supported by Science and Technology Department of Henan Province (CN) (grant 201702040 and 182102310085). The authors have disclosed no other financial relationships related to this article. Submitted September 24, 2019; accepted in revised form November 14, 2019. Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal’s website (www.ASWCjournal.com). Advances in Skin & Wound Care: November 2020 - Volume 33 - Issue 11 - p 608-612 doi: 10.1097/01.ASW.0000695784.82605.1e Buy SDC Metrics Abstract OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effectiveness of electric stimulation (ES) for diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) treatment. METHODS The authors searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for randomized clinical trials published through March 2019 that compared the efficacy of ES and standard wound care (SWC) versus SWC alone for DFU treatment. The outcomes were pooled using a random-effects model. RESULTS Of the 145 randomized clinical trials initially identified, seven studies (with a total of 274 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The percentage decrease in ulcer area at 4 weeks was significantly greater in patients treated with ES and SWC than SWC alone (standardized mean difference, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-1.57; P < .001). The ulcer healing rate at 12 weeks was also significantly faster in the ES group (risk difference, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.06–0.32; P = .005). Subgroup analysis showed comparable efficacies with different waveforms (monophasic vs biphasic). CONCLUSIONS Electrical stimulation appears to be an effective adjunctive therapy for accelerating DFU healing. Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.