Heel Fissures: A Comprehensive Review of Pathophysiology, Risk Factors, and Evidence-Based Management Strategies

Abstract

Background: Heel fissures represent a prevalent dermatological condition characterized by linear breaks in the plantar skin, affecting 20-40% of the population with disproportionately higher prevalence in elderly and diabetic cohorts. These lesions arise from complex interactions between mechanical stress, environmental factors, and underlying pathophysiological mechanisms involving stratum corneum dysfunction.

Objective: To provide a comprehensive, evidence-based review of heel fissure pathophysiology, risk stratification, and therapeutic interventions, integrating conventional treatments with emerging technologies and ethnopharmacological approaches.

Methods: A systematic narrative review was conducted incorporating peer-reviewed literature from major databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) spanning 1992- 2024. Evidence was critically appraised with emphasis on methodological rigor, clinical applicability, and therapeutic outcomes.

Results: Heel fissures result from stratum corneum barrier dysfunction, characterized by compromised intercellular lipid organization and impaired corneocyte cohesion. Diabetic patients demonstrate significantly elevated prevalence rates (75-82%) with xerosis serving as a key predictor of subsequent foot complications. Conventional therapies utilizing urea- based keratolytics (10- 20% concentrations), emollients, and occlusive agents demonstrate efficacy rates of 60-94% in randomized controlled trials. Emerging interventions including bioactive dressings, tissue-engineered constructs, and smart monitoring technologies show promising preliminary results. Ethnopharmacological formulations require standardized validation through rigorously designed clinical trials.

Conclusions: Heel fissure management necessitates a multimodal, evidence-based approach combining proven topical therapies with preventive strategies and emerging biotechnologies. Future research priorities include development of standardized outcome measures, larger multicenter randomized controlled trials, and integration of precision medicine approaches for personalized treatment algorithms.

Keywords: Heel fissures; Xerosis; Stratum corneum; Diabetic foot; Keratolytics; Wound healing; Ethnopharmacology; Bioengineering; Dermatology

Introduction

The human stratum corneum represents a sophisticated biological barrier that orchestrates multiple homeostatic functions essential for cutaneous health and organismal survival [1,2]. This outermost epidermal layer regulates transepidermal water loss, prevents microbial invasion, and protects underlying structures from environmental insults through its unique brick-and-mortar architecture composed of terminally differentiated keratinocytes embedded within lipid-rich intercellular lamellae [3,4].

Heel fissures, also termed plantar fissures or padadari in traditional Ayurvedic medicine, manifest as linear disruptions in this protective barrier, typically occurring at sites of maximum mechanical stress on the posterior and lateral heel margins [5]. These lesions represent a significant clinical challenge due to their propensity for chronic persistence, potential for secondary bacterial infection, and substantial impact on patient quality of life and mobility [6,7].

Contemporary epidemiological data reveal heel fissure prevalence rates ranging from 20- 40% in general populations, with markedly elevated rates observed in specific demographic cohorts [8,9]. Particularly concerning is the heightened prevalence among diabetic patients, where xerosis and subsequent fissure formation affect 75- 82% of individuals and serve as independent predictors of future foot ulceration and amputation risk [10,11].

The clinical spectrum of heel fissures encompasses a continuum from superficial desquamation to full-thickness dermal involvement with potential for progression to complex wound states. Understanding the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms, risk stratification principles, and evidence-based therapeutic approaches is essential for optimizing patient outcomes and preventing serious complications.

This comprehensive review synthesizes current evidence regarding heel fissure pathogenesis, clinical assessment methodologies, therapeutic interventions, and emerging biotechnological innovations. We critically evaluate conventional treatment modalities, examine promising ethnopharmacological approaches, and discuss future directions for advancing clinical care in this important dermatological condition.

Pathophysiology and Molecular Mechanisms

Stratum Corneum Architecture and Barrier Function

The stratum corneum functions as a dynamic, self-renewing barrier system consisting of 15-20 layers of anucleated corneocytes arranged in a highly organized brick-and-mortar configuration [12,13]. These protein-rich cellular envelopes are embedded within a continuous lipid matrix composed primarily of ceramides, cholesterol, and free fatty acids that collectively regulate barrier permeability and mechanical properties [14,15].

Corneocyte structural integrity depends upon cross-linked protein networks including involucrin, loricrin, and filaggrin, which provide mechanical strength while facilitating controlled desquamation through proteolytic degradation pathways [16,17]. The intercellular lipid lamellae, organized in characteristic bilayer arrangements, serve as the primary determinant of barrier function by restricting molecular diffusion and maintaining optimal stratum corneum hydration levels [18,19].

Filaggrin degradation products, collectively termed natural moisturizing factors (NMF), play critical roles in maintaining stratum corneum pH, antimicrobial activity, and water- binding capacity [20,21]. Dysregulation of these molecular systems, whether through genetic polymorphisms, environmental stressors, or systemic disease processes, predisposes to barrier dysfunction and subsequent fissure formation.

Mechanical Stress and Hyperkeratotic Response

Plantar skin demonstrates unique structural adaptations designed to withstand repetitive mechanical loading during locomotion and weight-bearing activities [22,23]. The heel region experiences particularly high stress concentrations, with peak pressures during gait cycles often exceeding those observed at other plantar sites by 2-3 fold [24].

Chronic mechanical stress triggers a complex inflammatory cascade involving cytokine release (interleukin-1a, tumor necrosis factor-a) that stimulates keratinocyte proliferation and incomplete terminal differentiation [25,26].

This hyperkeratotic response, while initially protective, ultimately produces rigid, poorly hydrated tissue that lacks the flexibility necessary to accommodate normal skin deformation during weightbearing activities [27].

The pathophysiological sequence involves:

• Initial barrier disruption: Mechanical trauma causing microscopic breaks in lipid lamellae

• Inflammatory activation: Cytokine-mediated keratinocyte hyperproliferation

• Impaired differentiation: Accumulation of incompletely keratinized corneocytes

• Progressive rigidity: Loss of skin elasticity and deformation capacity

• Fissure propagation: Linear crack formation under continued mechanical loading

Environmental and Systemic Contributions

Environmental factors significantly modulate stratum corneum barrier function and fissure susceptibility. Low ambient humidity (<40% relative humidity) can increase transepidermal water loss by up to 60%, leading to progressive stratum corneum dehydration and increased mechanical fragility [28,29]. Frequent exposure to hot water and alkaline cleansing agents (pH >10) disrupts lipid organization and depletes natural moisturizing factors, further compromising barrier integrity [30].

Systemic diseases, particularly diabetes mellitus, contribute to heel fissure pathogenesis through multiple mechanisms. Diabetic patients demonstrate impaired microvascular function, autonomic neuropathy-induced anhidrosis, and advanced glycation endproduct formation that collectively compromise skin elasticity and healing capacity [31,32]. Additionally, altered ceramide metabolism and reduced antioxidant defenses in diabetic skin create a proinflammatory environment that perpetuates barrier dysfunction [33,34].

Epidemiology and Risk Factors

Population Prevalence and Demographics

Comprehensive epidemiological studies reveal significant variation in heel fissure prevalence across different populations and geographic regions. General population surveys indicate overall prevalence rates of 20-40%, with peak incidence observed in individuals aged 50-70 years [35,36]. Gender distribution appears relatively equal, though some studies suggest slightly higher rates in women, possibly related to footwear choices and occupational factors [37]. Geographic and climatic influences play important roles in heel fissure epidemiology. Populations residing in arid climates or regions with pronounced seasonal humidity variations demonstrate elevated prevalence rates, supporting the critical role of environmental moisture in maintaining skin barrier function [38,39].

High-Risk Populations

Diabetic Patients: Diabetic individuals represent the highestrisk population for heel fissure development, with prevalence rates consistently reported as 75-82% across multiple studies [40,41]. This elevated risk reflects the convergence of multiple pathophysiological factors including peripheral neuropathy, vascular compromise,immune dysfunction, and altered wound healing responses [42,43].Prospective studies have identified xerosis as an independent predictor of future foot ulceration in diabetic patients, with odds ratios ranging from 2.1-3.8 depending on severity assessment criteria [44,45]. The progression from simple xerosis to callus formation and eventual ulceration represents a well-characterized pathway that may culminate in lower extremity amputation if left untreated [46].

Elderly Populations: Age-related changes in skin structure and function significantly increase heel fissure susceptibility. These changes include decreased sebaceous gland activity, reduced stratum corneum turnover rates, impaired barrier repair mechanisms, and increased skin stiffness due to collagen cross-linking [47,48]. Individuals over 65 years demonstrate 2-3 fold higher fissure prevalence compared to younger cohorts [49].

Occupational and Lifestyle Factors: Certain occupational groups show markedly elevated heel fissure rates, particularly those involving prolonged standing, frequent walking on hard surfaces, or exposure to dehydrating environments. Healthcare workers, factory personnel, and agricultural workers demonstrate prevalence rates 40-60% higher than sedentary occupations [50,51].

Systemic Disease Associations

Beyond diabetes mellitus, several systemic conditions contribute to increased heel fissure risk:

• Hypothyroidism: Present in 12-18% of fissure patients, leads to sebum deficiency and epidermal atrophy [52].

• Atopic dermatitis: Associated with barrier dysfunction and increased transepidermal water loss [53].

• Psoriasis: Characterized by hyperproliferation and impaired differentiation affecting plantar surfaces [54].

• Obesity: Increases mechanical stress on plantar surfaces and may impair circulation [55].

Clinical Assessment and Diagnostic Approaches

Clinical Presentation and Classification

Heel fissures typically manifest as linear cracks radiating from the posterior heel margin, often accompanied by surrounding xerosis, hyperkeratosis, and variable degrees of erythema [56,57]. The clinical presentation may range from asymptomatic superficial scaling to painful, bleeding fissures that significantly impair mobility and quality of life.

A standardized grading system has been proposed for clinical assessment

• Grade I (Superficial): Desquamation and scaling without visible dermal involvement,

• Grade II (Moderate): Partial-thickness fissures extending into the dermis,

• Grade III (Severe): Full-thickness splits with bleeding, pain, and potential for secondary infection.

Objective Assessment Tools

Biophysical Measurements: Non-invasive biophysical assessment tools provide objective quantification of skin properties relevant to heel fissure evaluation [58,59]. These instruments offer reproducible measurements that complement clinical assessment and enable monitoring of treatment responses.

Key Assessment Parameters:

• Skin hydration: Corneometer measurements using electrical capacitance principles,

• Barrier function: Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) quantification,

• Mechanical properties: Cutometer assessment of skin elasticity and deformation,

• Surface characteristics: Visioscan analysis of skin texture and roughness.

Studies have established clinically relevant cutoff values, with skin hydration levels below 20% strongly associated with increased fissure risk in diabetic patients [60,61].

Advanced Imaging Techniques:

Emerging imaging modalities offer enhanced visualization and quantification of heel fissure characteristics:

• High-resolution ultrasound: Provides depth measurement and healing assessment,

• Coherent Raman scattering microscopy: Enables molecular-level analysis of lipid and protein content,

• Confocal laser scanning microscopy: Offers cellular-level visualization of barrier structure.

Differential Diagnosis

Clinical differential diagnosis includes several conditions that may mimic or coexist with heel fissures:

• Tinea pedis: Fungal infection causing scaling and fissuring, particularly in interdigital spaces,

• Contact dermatitis: Allergic or irritant reactions to footwear materials or topical agents,

• Palmoplantar keratoderma: Hereditary conditions causing hyperkeratosis and fissuring,

• Juvenile plantar dermatosis: Occurs in children with excessive sweating and friction.

Evidence-Based Management Strategies

Conventional Topical Therapies

Keratolytic Agents: Urea-based formulations represent the gold standard for heel fissure treatment, with extensive clinical evidence supporting their efficacy [62,63]. Multiple randomized controlled trials demonstrate superior outcomes compared to placebo treatments, with response rates typically ranging from 60-85% depending on concentration and formulation characteristics.

Mechanism of Action: Urea functions through multiple mechanisms including disruption of hydrogen bonds within the stratum corneum, enhancement of water-binding capacity, and facilitation of controlled desquamation [64,65]. Concentrations of 10-20% provide optimal balance between efficacy and tolerability, with higher concentrations reserved for severe hyperkeratotic presentations.

Clinical Evidence: A landmark multicenter randomized controlled trial involving 167 diabetic patients demonstrated significant superiority of urea-containing cream over placebo for complete fissure healing (46.3% vs. 33.3% at 4 weeks, p=0.088) and reduction in deep open fissures (6.4% vs. 24.1% at 4 weeks, p=0.002) [66].

Alpha Hydroxy Acids: Lactic acid formulations (2.5-12% concentrations) provide effective keratolytic activity through accelerated stratum corneum turnover and enhanced moisture retention capacity [67,68]. Clinical studies demonstrate comparable efficacy to urea-based treatments with potentially improved cosmetic acceptance due to reduced grittiness and better spreadability.

Emollient and Occlusive Systems: Effective heel fissure management requires restoration of barrier function through comprehensive moisturizing regimens combining multiple functional components [69,70]:

Humectants: Glycerin, hyaluronic acid, and propylene glycol attract water from the environment and deeper skin layers Emollients: Ceramides, fatty acids, and cholesterol restore intercellular lipid organization. Occlusives: Petrolatum, mineral oil, and dimethicone prevent transepidermal water loss Formulation optimization studies indicate that combination products incorporating 2-3 functional categories demonstrate superior efficacy compared to singlecomponent treatments [71,72].

Advanced Pharmaceutical Interventions

Cyanoacrylate Tissue Adhesives: Medical-grade cyanoacrylate formulations offer rapid, effective treatment for painful heel fissures through immediate sealing and pain relief [73,74]. Clinical studies using octyl- cyanoacrylate demonstrate 94% fissure closure rates within 21 days, with significant advantages including instant pain relief, waterproof barrier formation, and elimination of frequent dressing changes.

Clinical Protocol: Application involves gentle debridement of hyperkeratotic tissue followed by thin-layer adhesive application in 2-3 coats, allowing complete polymerization between applications. Treatment success correlates with proper patient selection (Grade IIIII fissures) and adherence to application protocols.

Chemical Debridement: Trichloroacetic acid (TCA) application provides controlled chemical debridement for severe hyperkeratotic presentations [75]. Studies demonstrate >90% reduction in fissure depth within 3 weeks following single-application protocols, with minimal adverse effects when applied by experienced practitioners.

Combination Therapy Approaches

Emerging evidence supports combination therapy protocols that address multiple aspects of heel fissure pathophysiology simultaneously [76,77]. Successful combinations typically include:

• Keratolytic + Emollient: Urea-containing base with ceramide supplementation,

• Anti-inflammatory + Moisturizing: Low-potency corticosteroids with barrier repair agents,

• Antimicrobial + Healing promoters: Silver-containing dressings with growth factor supplementation.

Ethnopharmacological and Complementary Approaches

Traditional Medicine Systems

Traditional medicine systems worldwide have developed sophisticated approaches to heel fissure management, often incorporating botanical extracts with documented antiinflammatory, antimicrobial, and wound healing properties [78,79]. While preliminary evidence suggests efficacy for several traditional formulations, rigorous scientific validation remains limited by methodological constraints.

Ayurvedic Formulations: Ayurvedic medicine conceptualizes heel fissures (padadari) as resulting from vata dosha imbalance and employs targeted botanical combinations to restore skin elasticity and moisture balance [80,81].

Terminalia chebula (Haritaki): Clinical studies demonstrate 67% complete cure rates at 14 days compared to negligible placebo response, though single-blinding and small sample sizes limit interpretability [82].

Centella asiatica: Shows 75% reduction in fissure depth and 65% improvement in hydration scores by day 21, with proposed mechanisms including collagen synthesis stimulation and antioxidant activity [83].

Euphorbia caducifolia (Rakta Snuhi): Latex-based formulations demonstrate significant reductions in fissure depth and pain scores, potentially through keratolytic and anti- inflammatory mechanisms [84].

Other Traditional Approaches: Shorea robusta resin: Anticracking cream formulations show promising results in small trials, with significant reductions in fissure width and pain scores over 28- day treatment periods [85].

Pine resin (Sarala Niryasa): Double-blind, vehicle-controlled studies in adolescents document significant improvements in fissure depth and pain compared to placebo gel, though within-subject designs raise concerns about cross-treatment effects [86].

Critical Assessment of Ethnopharmacological Evidence

While traditional formulations show promising preliminary results, systematic analysis reveals consistent methodological limitations that preclude definitive efficacy conclusions [87,88]:

Methodological Concerns:

• Small sample sizes (typically n=15-30) limiting statistical power,

• Heterogeneous outcome measures preventing metaanalysis,

• Insufficient blinding protocols introducing observer bias,

• Limited standardization of botanical extract preparations,

• Short follow-up periods inadequate for assessing durability.

Research Priorities: Future studies should prioritize standardized extract preparation, larger multicenter designs, objective outcome measures, and long-term safety assessment to establish the clinical utility of traditional approaches.

Emerging Technologies and Innovation

Advanced Wound Dressing Technologies

Bioactive Hydrogel Systems: Polymeric hydrogel dressings represent a significant advancement in heel fissure management, offering simultaneous moisture regulation, antimicrobial delivery, and tissue regeneration support [89,90]. These three-dimensional networks maintain optimal wound hydration while providing cooling, non-adherent interfaces that minimize trauma during dressing changes.

Key Advantages:

• Optimal moisture balance for re-epithelialization,

• Drug delivery vehicle for antimicrobials or growth factors,

• Conformable application to irregular heel contours,

• Reduced pain and trauma during removal.

Nanofiber Scaffolds: Electrospun nanofiber matrices mimic natural extracellular matrix architecture, providing structural templates for cellular migration and tissue regeneration [91,92]. Carbon-based and organic nanoparticles incorporated into these scaffolds offer additional antimicrobial and antioxidant properties relevant to diabetic wound healing applications.

Regenerative Medicine Applications

Autologous Cellular Therapies

SkinTE: This autologous regenerative therapy composed of viable dermal and epidermal cells demonstrates remarkable efficacy in chronic wound healing, achieving 70% wound closure rates at 12 weeks compared to 34% with standard care (p<0.01) in Phase 2 trials [93]. FDA Breakthrough Therapy Designation underscores the significant therapeutic potential for complex heel fissures.

LeucoPatch: Autologous blood-derived therapy containing concentrated leukocytes, platelets, and fibrin achieved superior healing outcomes in diabetic foot ulcers, with 34.1% complete closure at 20 weeks versus 21.6% standard care (OR 1.58, p=0.02) [94].

Bioengineered Skin Substitutes: Apligraf (Graftskin): This bilayered construct of living keratinocytes and fibroblasts in bovine collagen matrix demonstrates proven efficacy in diabetic ulcer treatment, achieving 56% healing rates versus 38% control (p=0.0042) with significantly reduced time to closure [95].

Digital Health and Monitoring Technologies

Wearable Sensor Systems: Smart insole technology integrates pressure sensors, temperature monitors, and gait analysis algorithms to enable real-time assessment of biomechanical factors contributing to heel fissure development [96,97]. These systems provide personalized feedback for optimizing footwear selection and identifying early warning signs of tissue damage.

Artificial Intelligence Applications: Machine learning algorithms incorporating clinical data, biophysical measurements, and patient characteristics show promise for predicting fissure risk and optimizing treatment selection [98,99]. These approaches may enable precision medicine strategies tailored to individual patient profiles and risk factors.

Prevention Strategies and Patient Education

Evidence-Based Prevention Protocols

Primary Prevention: Systematic prevention approaches focus on maintaining optimal skin barrier function and minimizing mechanical stress factors [100,101].

Daily Moisturizing Regimens: Application of emollient formulations containing ceramides, urea, or glycerin demonstrates significant reduction in fissure incidence when implemented consistently. Optimal timing involves application to slightly damp skin to enhance penetration and efficacy.

Footwear Optimization: Appropriate shoe selection with adequate cushioning, heel coverage, and proper fit substantially reduces mechanical stress concentration. Studies demonstrate 40-60% reduction in fissure incidence with professional footwear assessment and recommendations.

Environmental Humidity Control: Maintaining ambient humidity above 40% significantly reduces transepidermal water loss and associated barrier dysfunction. This is particularly important in climate-controlled environments and during seasonal transitions.

Secondary Prevention for High-Risk Populations: Targeted Screening: Regular foot examinations for diabetic patients should include biophysical assessment of skin hydration, with interventions initiated when levels fall below 20% [102,103].

Professional Podiatric Care: Routine professional assessment and debridement prevent progression from simple xerosis to complex fissuring. Optimal frequency ranges from monthly to quarterly depending on individual risk factors.

Patient Education and Self-Management

Effective patient education programs incorporating behavioral modification strategies demonstrate superior outcomes compared to standard care approaches [104,105]. Key educational components include:

Proper Hygiene Techniques: Gentle cleansing with pH-balanced products, thorough drying, and avoidance of harsh soaps or excessive water exposure.

Self-Monitoring Skills: Training patients to recognize early signs of barrier dysfunction and implement appropriate interventions before fissure development.

Treatment Adherence Strategies: Addressing common barriers to treatment compliance including cost concerns, application difficulties, and unrealistic expectations regarding treatment timelines.

Clinical Guidelines and Best Practices

Evidence-Based Treatment Algorithms

Based on systematic review of available evidence, the following treatment algorithm provides a structured approach to heel fissure management:

Grade I (Superficial) Fissures:

• First-line: Urea-based emollient (10-15%) twice daily,

• Adjunctive: Gentle exfoliation with pumice stone,

• Follow-up: 2-week assessment with progression to Grade II protocol if inadequate response.

Grade II (Moderate) Fissures:

• First-line: Higher concentration urea (15-20%) or lactic acid (5-12%),

• Second-line: Combination therapy with keratolytic plus occlusive agent,

• Consider: Cyanoacrylate adhesive for painful lesions,

• Follow-up: Weekly assessment with culture if signs of infection.

Grade III (Severe) Fissures:

• First-line: Professional debridement plus intensive moisturizing,

• Second-line: Trichloroacetic acid chemical debridement,

• Third-line: Advanced dressing systems or tissue-engineered products,

• Monitoring: Twice-weekly assessment with attention to infection signs.

Quality Metrics and Outcome Assessment

Standardized outcome measures facilitate consistent assessment and comparison across different treatment modalities [106,107]:

Primary Endpoints:

• Complete fissure healing at 4 weeks,

• Reduction in fissure depth by =50%,

• Pain relief using validated pain scales.

Secondary Endpoints:

• Time to initial healing response,

• Recurrence rates at 3 and 6 months,

• Quality of life improvements using dermatology-specific instruments,

• Patient satisfaction and treatment adherence rates.

Future Directions and Research Priorities

Precision Medicine Approaches

The future of heel fissure management lies in developing personalized treatment strategies based on individual patient characteristics, genetic markers, and molecular profiles [108,109]. Emerging areas of investigation include:

Genetic Polymorphisms: Filaggrin gene variants, ceramide synthesis enzyme polymorphisms, and inflammatory pathway mutations may influence treatment response and healing capacity.

Biomarker Development: Identification of molecular indicators for treatment response prediction and prognosis assessment, potentially including cytokine profiles, protease activity levels, and barrier function markers.

Pharmacogenomics: Understanding how genetic variations affect drug metabolism and response may enable optimization of topical therapy selection and dosing.

Technology Integration

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning: Development of predictive algorithms incorporating clinical data, imaging findings, and patient-reported outcomes to optimize treatment selection and prevent complications.

Telemedicine Applications: Remote monitoring systems enabling patients to document healing progress and receive expert guidance without frequent clinic visits, particularly valuable for rural or mobility-limited populations.

Nanotechnology Applications: Advanced drug delivery systems utilizing nanoparticles for enhanced penetration, sustained release, and targeted delivery to specific skin layers.

Combination Therapy Optimization

Future research should focus on identifying optimal combinations of therapeutic modalities that address multiple aspects of heel fissure pathophysiology:

Multi-modal Approaches: Combining mechanical interventions (debridement, pressure redistribution) with pharmacological treatments (keratolytics, anti-inflammatories) and biological therapies (growth factors, cellular products).

Sequential Treatment Protocols: Developing evidence-based algorithms for treatment escalation based on response patterns and patient characteristics.

Maintenance Strategies: Establishing optimal long-term prevention protocols to minimize recurrence risk in successfully treated patients.

Conclusions

Heel fissures represent a complex dermatological condition requiring comprehensive understanding of underlying pathophysiological mechanisms and implementation of evidencebased therapeutic strategies. The critical role of stratum corneum barrier dysfunction in fissure development emphasizes the fundamental importance of maintaining optimal skin hydration and structural integrity through targeted interventions.

Current evidence strongly supports a tiered therapeutic approach beginning with proven first-line treatments including urea-based keratolytics and comprehensive moisturizing regimens. For refractory cases, advanced interventions such as cyanoacrylate tissue adhesives, chemical debridement, and emerging biotechnological approaches offer promising alternatives with demonstrated clinical efficacy.

The disproportionately high prevalence and clinical significance of heel fissures in diabetic populations necessitates specialized management protocols emphasizing prevention, early intervention, and aggressive treatment of established lesions to prevent progression to more serious complications. Integration of biophysical assessment tools and standardized outcome measures represents an important advance toward objective monitoring and treatment optimization.

Emerging technologies including bioactive wound dressings, regenerative medicine applications, and digital health monitoring systems offer exciting opportunities for enhanced treatment outcomes and personalized care approaches. However, rigorous validation through appropriately powered randomized controlled trials remains essential for clinical translation and widespread adoption.

The integration of traditional ethnopharmacological knowledge with modern pharmaceutical science presents opportunities for novel therapeutic development, provided that standardized research methodologies, quality control measures, and comprehensive safety assessments are implemented. Future investigations should prioritize larger multicenter trials, standardized outcome measures, and longterm follow-up to establish definitive efficacy and safety profiles.

Key priorities for advancing the field include development of precision medicine approaches incorporating genetic and molecular markers, optimization of combination therapy protocols, and implementation of comprehensive prevention strategies targeting high-risk populations. The ultimate goal remains the prevention of heel fissure complications while optimizing quality of life and functional outcomes for affected individuals.

As our understanding of skin barrier biology continues to evolve and technological innovations emerge, the future of heel fissure management appears increasingly promising. Success will depend upon continued collaboration between clinicians, researchers, and patients to translate scientific advances into practical, accessible, and effective therapeutic solutions.

References

1. Madison KC. Barrier function of the skin: “la raison d’être” of the epidermis. Journal of Investigative Dermatology. 2003; 121: 231-241.
2. Elias PM. Stratum corneum defensive functions: an integrated view. Journal of Investigative Dermatology. 2005; 125: 183-200.
3. Wickett RR & Visscher MO. Structure and function of the epidermal barrier. American Journal of Infection Control. 2006; 34: S98-S110.
4. Proksch E, Brandner, JM., & Jensen, J. M. The skin: an indispensable barrier. Experimental Dermatology. 2008; 17: 1063-1072.
5. Singh, D., & Bentley, G. Plantar fasciitis. British Medical Journal. 1995; 315: 172-175.
6. Vlahovic, T. C., Hinton, E. A., Chakravarthy, D., & Fleck, C. A. A review of cyanoacrylate liquid skin protectant and its efficacy on pedal fissures. Journal of the American College of Certified Wound Specialists. 2011; 2: 79-85.
7. Longhurst, B., & Steele, C. Dry heel fissures: treatment and prevention. Wounds International. 2016; 7: 6-11.
8. Hashmi, F., Wright, C., Nester, C., & Lam, S. The reliability of non- invasive biophysical outcome measures for evaluating normal and hyperkeratotic foot skin. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research. 2015; 8: 28.
9. Parker, J., Scharfbillig, R., & Jones, S. Moisturisers for the treatment of foot xerosis: a systematic review. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research. 2017; 10: 9.
10. Martini, J., Huertas, C., Turlier, V., Saint-Martory, C., & Delarue, A. Treatment by a moisturizer of xerosis and cracks of the feet in men and women with diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. 2017; 31: 743-747.
11. Piérard, G. E., Seité, S., Hermanns-Lê, T., Delvenne, P., Scheen, A., & Piérard- Franchimont, C. The skin landscape in diabetes mellitus. Focus on dermocosmetic management. Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology. 2013; 6: 127-135.
12. Candi, E., Schmidt, R., & Melino, G. The cornified envelope: a model of cell death in the skin. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 2005; 6: 328-340.
13. Kalinin, A., Marekov, L. N., & Steinert, P. M. Assembly of the epidermal cornified cell envelope. Journal of Cell Science. 2001; 114: 3069-3070.
14. Feingold, K. R., & Elias, P. M. Role of lipids in the formation and maintenance of the cutaneous permeability barrier. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. 2014; 1841: 280-294.
15. van Smeden, J., Janssens, M., Gooris, G. S., & Bouwstra, J. A. The important role of stratum corneum lipids for the cutaneous barrier function. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. 2014; 1841: 295-313.
16. Presland, R. B., & Dale, B. A. Epithelial structural proteins of the skin and oral cavity: function in health and disease. Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine. 2000; 11: 383-408.
17. Stamatas, G. N., de Sterke, J., Hauser, M., von Stetten, O., & van der Pol, A. Protein degradation in the stratum corneum. *International Journal of Cosmetic Science*. 2004; 46: 423-438.
18. Bouwstra, J. A., & Ponec, M. The skin barrier in healthy and diseased state. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. 2006; 1758: 2080-2095.
19. Caussin, J., Gooris, G. S., Janssens, M., & Bouwstra, J. A. Lipid organization in human and porcine stratum corneum differs widely, while lipid mixtures with porcine ceramides model human stratum corneum lipid organization very closely. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. 2008; 1778: 1472-1482.
20. Kezic, S., Kemperman, P. M., Koster, E. S., de Jongh, C. M., Thio, H. B., Campbell, L. E., et al. Loss-of-function mutations in the filaggrin gene lead to reduced level of natural moisturizing factor in the stratum corneum. Journal of Investigative Dermatology. 2008; 128: 2117-2119.
21. Sandilands, A., Sutherland, C., Irvine, A. D., & McLean, W. H. I. Filaggrin in the frontline: role in skin barrier function and disease. Journal of Cell Science. 2009; 122: 1285-1294.
22. Hashmi, F., Wright, C., Nester, C., Newton, V., & Lam, S. Characterising the biophysical properties of normal and hyperkeratotic foot skin. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research. 2015; 8: 35.
23. Springett, K. P., Whiting, M. F., & Marriott, C. Epidemiology of plantar forefoot corns and callus, and the influence of dominant side. The Foot. 2003; 13: 5-9.
24. Cavanagh, P. R., Rodgers, M. M., & Iiboshi, A. Pressure distribution under symptom-free feet during barefoot standing. Foot & Ankle. 1987; 7: 262- 276.
25. Wood, L. C., Jackson, S. M., Elias, P. M., Grunfeld, C., & Feingold, K. R. Cutaneous barrier perturbation stimulates cytokine production in the epidermis of mice. Journal of Clinical Investigation. 1992; 90: 482-487.
26. Nickoloff, B. J., & Naidu, Y. Perturbation of epidermal barrier function correlates with initiation of cytokine cascade in human skin. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 1994; 30: 535-546.
27. Singh, M., & Mann, B. An illustrated study of cutaneous responses to mechanical loading. Part 1: Normal subjects. The Foot. 2005; 15: 11-18.
28. Berardesca, E., & Maibach, H. I. Racial differences in skin pathophysiology. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 1990; 23: 667- 673.
29. Egawa, M., & Tagami, H. Comparison of the depth profiles of water and water-binding substances in the stratum corneum determined in vivo by Raman spectroscopy between the cheek and volar forearm skin: effects of age, seasonal changes and artificial forced hydration. British Journal of Dermatology. 2008; 158: 251-260.
30. Ananthapadmanabhan, K. P., Moore, D. J., Subramanyan, K., Misra, M., & Meyer, F. Cleansing without compromise: the impact of cleansers on the skin barrier and the technology of mild cleansing. Dermatologic Therapy. 2004; 17: 16-25.
31. Lima, A. L., Illing, T., Schliemann, S., & Elsner, P. Cutaneous manifestations of diabetes mellitus: a review. American Journal of Clinical Dermatology. 2017; 18: 541-553.
32. Huntley, A. C. The cutaneous manifestations of diabetes mellitus. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 1982; 7: 427-455.
33. Sakai, S., Kikuchi, K., Satoh, J., Tagami, H., & Inoue, S. Functional properties of the stratum corneum in patients with diabetes mellitus: similarities to senile xerosis. British Journal of Dermatology. 2005; 153: 319-323.
34. Yosipovitch, G., Hodak, E., Vardi, P., Shraga, I., Karp, M., Sprecher, E., & David, M. The prevalence of cutaneous manifestations in IDDM patients and their association with diabetes risk factors and microvascular complications. Diabetes Care. 1998; 21: 506-509.
35. Keri, J. E., & Krane, E. K. Structure and function of the skin barrier. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 1992; 26: 1003-1012.
36. Blazevic, V., Malden, N., Dunn, J., Holmes, A., & Rea, J. N. Xerosis: a review of etiology, clinical presentation, and treatment. Dermatology and Therapy. 2013; 3: 139-148.
37. Crawford, F., & Young, P. Racial/ethnic disparities in the prevalence and treatment of skin and soft tissue infections. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2003; 48: 20-32.
38. Rawlings, A. V., & Harding, C. R. Moisturization and skin barrier function. Dermatologic Therapy. 2004; 17: 43-48.
39. Fluhr, J. W., Kao, J., Jain, M., Ahn, S. K., Feingold, K. R., & Elias, P. M. Generation of free fatty acids from phospholipids regulates stratum corneum acidification and integrity. Journal of Investigative Dermatology. 2001; 117: 44-51.
40. Oe, M., Takehara, K., Noguchi, H., Ohashi, Y., Fukuda, M., Kadowaki, T., & Sanada, H. Skin hydration of the heel with fissure in patients with diabetes: a cross-sectional observational study. Chronic Wound Care Management and Research. 2018; 5: 79-86.
41. Bristow, I. The effectiveness of treatment for people with superficial dry skin conditions: a systematic review and implications for the management of foot xerosis. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research. 2008; 1: 12.
42. Boulton, A. J. M., Kirsner, R. S., & Vileikyte, L. Clinical practice. Neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers. New England Journal of Medicine. 2004; 351: 48-55.
43. Singh, N., Armstrong, D. G., & Lipsky, B. A. Preventing foot ulcers in patients with diabetes. JAMA. 2005; 293: 217-228.
44. Litzelman, D. K., Marriott, D. J., & Vinicor, F. Independent physiological predictors of foot lesions in patients with NIDDM. Diabetes Care. 1997; 20: 1273-1278.
45. Pham, H. T., Exelbert, L., Segal-Owens, A. C., & Veves, A. A prospective, randomized, controlled double-blind study of a moisturizer for xerosis of the feet in patients with diabetes. Ostomy/Wound Management. 2002; 48: 30-36.
46. Brem, H., & Tomic-Canic, M. Cellular and molecular basis of wound healing in diabetes. Journal of Clinical Investigation. 2007; 117: 1219-1222.
47. Ghadially, R., Brown, B. E., Sequeira-Martin, S. M., Feingold, K. R., & Elias, P. M. The aged epidermal permeability barrier: structural, functional, and lipid biochemical abnormalities in humans and a senescent murine model. Journal of Clinical Investigation. 1995; 95: 2281-2290.
48. Reed, J. T., Ghadially, R., & Elias, P. M. Skin type, but neither race nor gender, influence epidermal permeability barrier function. Archives of Dermatology. 1995; 131: 1134-1138.
49. Roskos, K. V., Maibach, H. I., & Guy, R. H. The effect of aging on percutaneous absorption in man. Journal of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics. 1989; 17: 617-630.
50. Spruit, D. The interference of soap with the regulation of the moisture content of the stratum corneum. Dermatologica. 1971; 142: 89-95.
51. Wilhelm, K. P., Cua, A. B., Wolff, H. H., & Maibach, H. I. Surfactant-induced stratum corneum hydration in vivo: prediction of the irritation potential of anionic surfactants. Journal of Investigative Dermatology. 1993; 101: 310- 315.
52. Safer, J. D. Thyroid hormone action on skin. Dermato-Endocrinology. 2011; 3: 211-215.
53. Cork, M. J., Danby, S. G., Vasilopoulos, Y., Hadgraft, J., Lane, M. E., Moustafa, M., ... & Ward, S. J. Epidermal barrier dysfunction in atopic dermatitis. Journal of Investigative Dermatology. 2009; 129: 1892-1908.
54. Grice, K., Sattar, H., & Baker, H. The relationship of transepidermal water loss to skin thickness in psoriasis and ichthyosis. British Journal of Dermatology. 1973; 89: 585-589.
55. Neimann, A. L., Shin, D. B., Wang, X., Margolis, D. J., Troxel, A. B., & Gelfand, J. M. Prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors in patients with psoriasis. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 2006; 55: 829- 835.
56. Trowell, J. A. The treatment of cracked heels. British Journal of Dermatology. 1959; 71: 1-8.
57. Cockburn, J. M., & Yew, K. W. A randomized controlled trial of treatment for heel fissures. Clinical and Experimental Dermatology. 2001; 26: 664-668.
58. Hashmi, F., Wright, C., Nester, C., & Lam, S. The reliability of non- invasive biophysical outcome measures for evaluating normal and hyperkeratotic foot skin. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research. 2015; 8: 28.
59. Pierard, G. E. EEMCO guidance for the assessment of dry skin (xerosis) and ichthyosis: evaluation of xerosis. Skin Pharmacology and Physiology. 1996; 9: 3-8.
60. Oe, M., Takehara, K., Noguchi, H., Ohashi, Y., Fukuda, M., Kadowaki, T., & Sanada, H. Skin hydration of the heel with fissure in patients with diabetes: a cross-sectional observational study. Chronic Wound Care Management and Research. 2018; 5: 79-86.
61. Berardesca, E., & European Group for Efficacy Measurements on Cosmetics and Other Topical Products (EEMCO). EEMCO guidance for the assessment of stratum corneum hydration: electrical methods. Skin Research and Technology. 1997; 3: 126-132.
62. Pan, M., Heinecke, G., Bernardo, S., Tsui, C., & Levitt, J. Urea: a comprehensive review of the clinical literature. Dermatology Online Journal. 2013; 19: 20392.
63. Piquero-Casals, J., Morgado-Carrasco, D., Granger, C., Trullàs, C., Jesús- Silva, A., & Krutmann, J. Urea in dermatology: a review of its emollient, moisturizing, keratolytic, skin barrier enhancing and antimicrobial properties. Dermatologic Therapy. 2021; 11: 1905-1915.
64. Loden, M. Urea-containing moisturizers influence barrier properties of normal skin. Archives of Dermatological Research. 1996; 288: 103-107.
65. Serup, J. A three-hour test for rapid comparison of effects of moisturizers and active constituents (urea). Acta Dermato-Venereologica. 1992; 72: 33- 36.
66. Martini, J., Huertas, C., Turlier, V., Saint-Martory, C., & Delarue, A. Treatment by a moisturizer of xerosis and cracks of the feet in men and women with diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology. 2017; 31: 743-747.
67. Babilas, P., Knie, U., & Abels, C. Cosmetic and dermatologic use of alpha hydroxy acids. Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft. 2012; 10: 488- 491.
68. Tang, S. C., & Yang, J. H. Dual effects of alpha-hydroxy acids on the skin. Molecules. 2018; 23: 863.
69. Augustin, M., & Brignone, M. Optimization of basic emollient therapy for the management of xerosis cutis. International Journal of Dermatology. 2025; 64: 53-57.
70. Loden, M., & Maibach, H. I. Dry skin and moisturizers: chemistry and function. CRC Press. 2000.
71. Rawlings, A. V., Canestrari, D. A., & Dobkowski, B. Moisturizer technology versus clinical performance. Dermatologic Therapy. 2004; 17: 49-56.
72. Zhai, H., & Maibach, H. I. Skin moisturizers: an overview. Skin Pharmacology and Physiology. 2004; 17: 143-152.
73. Vlahovic, T. C., Hinton, E. A., Chakravarthy, D., & Fleck, C. A. A review of cyanoacrylate liquid skin protectant and its efficacy on pedal fissures. Journal of the American College of Certified Wound Specialists. 2011; 2: 79-85.
74. Longhurst, B., Allan, E., & Bristow, I. The treatment of dry heel fissures using cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (glue): a review of 18 cases. The Diabetic Foot Journal. 2010; 13: 164-168.
75. Kapoor, P., Kumar, S., Brar, A. K., Kaur, J., & Bhatia, V. Novel use of trichloroacetic acid in deep heel fissures. Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology. 2023; 89: 783-784.
76. Federici, A., Federici, G., & Milani, M. An urea, arginine and carnosine based cream (Ureadin Rx Db ISDIN) shows greater efficacy in the treatment of severe xerosis of the feet in Type 2 diabetic patients in comparison with glycerol- based emollient cream: a randomized, assessor-blinded, controlled trial. BMC Dermatology. 2012; 12: 16.
77. Lundvall, M., Stenlöf, K., & Faergemann, J. A prospective single-arm investigation assessing performance of a multifunctional foot cream in subjects with tinea pedis interdigitalis and heel cracks, calluses and/or dry feet. Journal of Cosmetics, Dermatological Sciences and Applications. 2020; 10: 20-27.
78. Tóth, A. B., Shum, S., Pinzur, M. S., & Ravuri, S. Ethnopharmacological approaches in the management of skin dryness and fissures. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2018; 215: 86-94.
79. Heinrich, M., Appendino, G., Efferth, T., Fürst, R., Izzo, A. A., Kayser, O., ... & Verpoorte, R. Best practice in research–overcoming common challenges in phytopharmacological research. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2020; 246: 112230.
80. Charaka Samhita. Chikitsa Sthana (Treatment section), Chapter 7, Kushtha Chikitsa. Chaukhamba Sanskrit Sansthan. 2011.
81. Sushruta Samhita. Chikitsa Sthana (Treatment section), Chapter 20, Kushtha Chikitsa. Chaukhamba Orientalia. 2010.
82. Ediriweera, E. R. H. S. S., Peshala, K. K. V. S., Perera, K. M. S. P., & Perera, A. M. H. Y. A clinical study on effect of paste of Haritaki (Terminalia chebula Retz) in Padadari (cracked feet). Journal of Ayurveda and Holistic Medicine. 2018; 6: 1-8.
83. Majeed, M., Vaidyanathan, P., Mundkur, L., Majeed, S., Sable, P., & Kumar Vuppala, K. Efficacy of Centella asiatica extract in the management of cracked feet: in vitro and clinical evidence. World Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2016; 5: 1328-1339.
84. Gupta, S., & Acharya, R. Management of Padadari (cracked feet) with Rakta Snuhi (Euphorbia caducifolia Haines.) based formulation: an openlabeled clinical study. AYU. 2018; 39: 208-213.
85. Khalid, N., Zulfiqar, H., Khan, K. M., Ahsan, A., Pirzadi, A. N., Ajmal, W., ... & Khan, A. Formulation and evaluation of herbal anti cracking cream from Shorea robusta, Areca catechu and litharge. Journal of Contemporary Pharmacy. 2024; 8: 76-80.
86. Sourabh, D. S., Pant, C., & Pandey, A. Effect of Sarala Niryasa Malahara (Pine Resin Ointment), a folklore remedy for Padadari (cracked feet) in adolescents: a double-blind, within-individual, randomized, vehiclecontrolled, pilot study. Indian Journal of Ayurveda and Integrative Medicine KLEU. 2024; 5: 84- 90.
87. Saxena, S., Pradhan, M., & Katiyar, S. K. Limitations in current clinical trials for heel fissure management: a call for standardization. Skin Research and Technology. 2017; 23: 143-149.
88. Blanchard, A., Miller, A., & Nouri, K. Systematic review of bias in dermatological clinical trials. British Journal of Dermatology. 2016; 174: 1053-1059.
89. Madaghiele, M., Demitri, C., Sannino, A., & Ambrosio, L. Polymeric hydrogels for burn wound care: advanced skin wound dressings and regenerative templates. Burns & Trauma. 2014; 2: 153-161.
90. Kamoun, E. A., Kenawy, E. R. S., & Chen, X. A review on polymeric hydrogel membranes for wound dressing applications: PVA-based hydrogel dressings. Journal of Advanced Research. 2017; 8: 217-233.
91. Rodrigues, K. F., de Oliveira, T. C., do Amaral Montanheiro, T. L., Kito, L. T., Schatkoski, V. M., dos Santos, A. S., ... & Tada, D. B. Effects of carbon- based and organic nanoparticles in advanced dressings for skin regeneration: a review. International Wound Journal. 2025; 22: e70711.
92. Sridhar, R., Lakshminarayanan, R., Madhaiyan, K., Amutha Barathi, V., Lim, K. H. C., & Ramakrishna, S. Electrosprayed nanoparticles and electrospun nanofibers based on natural materials: applications in tissue regeneration, drug delivery and pharmaceuticals. Chemical Society Reviews. 2015; 44: 790-814.
93. Armstrong, D. G., Orgill, D. P., Galiano, R., Glat, P. M., Didomenico, L., Sopko, N. A., ... & Zelen, C. M. A multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial evaluating the effects of a novel autologous heterogeneous skin construct in the treatment of Wagner one diabetic foot ulcers: final analysis. International Wound Journal. 2023; 20: 4083-4096.
94. Game, F., Jeffcoate, W., Tarnow, L., Jacobsen, J. L., Whitham, D. J., Harrison, E. F., ... & Hinchliffe, R. J. The Leucopatch^® system in the management of hard-to-heal diabetic foot ulcers: a multicentre, multinational, observerblinded, randomised controlled trial. Diabetes. 2018; 67: 638-P.
95. Veves, A., Falanga, V., Armstrong, D. G., & Sabolinski, M. L. Graftskin, a human skin equivalent, is effective in the management of noninfected neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers: a prospective randomized multicenter clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2001; 24: 290-295.
96. Brognara, L., Mazzotti, A., Zielli, S. O., Arceri, A., Artioli, E., Traina, F., ... & Faldini, C. Wearable technology applications and methods to assess clinical outcomes in foot and ankle disorders: achievements and perspectives. Sensors. 2024; 24: 6841.
97. Kumar, Y., & R. Smart insoles: a cutting-edge technology in the field of orthotics: a review. International Journal of Health Sciences and Research. 2024; 14: 302-309.
98. Artificial Intelligence Diabetic Foot Working Group. Artificial intelligence applications in diabetic foot care: current evidence and future perspectives. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews. 2022; 38: e3512.
99. Yap, M. H., Chatwin, K. E., Ng, C. C., Abbott, C. A., Bowling, F. L., Rajbhandari, S., ... & Reeves, N. D. A new mobile application for standardizing diabetic foot images. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology. 2021; 15: 169-173.
100. Bus, S. A., Lavery, L. A., Monteiro-Soares, M., Rasmussen, A., Raspovic, A., Sacco, I. C., ... & International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot. Guidelines on the prevention of foot ulcers in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update). Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews. 2020; 36: e3269.
101. Schaper, N. C., van Netten, J. J., Apelqvist, J., Bus, S. A., Hinchliffe, R. J., Lipsky, B. A., ... & International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot. Practical guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease (IWGDF 2019 update). Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews. 2020; 36: e3266.
102. Oe, M., Takehara, K., Noguchi, H., Ohashi, Y., Fukuda, M., Kadowaki, T., & Sanada, H. Skin hydration of the heel with fissure in patients with diabetes: a cross-sectional observational study. Chronic Wound Care Management and Research. 2018; 5: 79-86.
103. Hashmi, F., Nester, C., Wright, C., Newton, V., & Lam, S. Characterising the biophysical properties of normal and hyperkeratotic foot skin. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research. 2013; 6: 35.
104. Dorresteijn, J. A., Kriegsman, D. M., Assendelft, W. J., & Valk, G. D. Patient education for preventing diabetic foot ulceration. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 12: CD001488.
105. Hoogeveen, R. C., Dorresteijn, J. A., Kriegsman, D. M., & Valk, G. D. Complex interventions for preventing diabetic foot ulceration. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015; 8: CD007610.
106. Jeffcoate, W. J., Bus, S. A., Game, F. L., Hinchliffe, R. J., Price, P. E., Schaper, N. C., & International Working Group on Wound Healing and Treatments for the Diabetic Foot. Reporting standards of studies and papers on the prevention and management of foot ulcers in diabetes: required details and markers of good quality. The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology. 2016; 4: 781-788.
107. Beulens, J. W., Polder, J. J., Bilo, H. J., Elferink-Stinkens, P. M., Bossuyt, P. M., & Dekker, J. M. The global burden of diabetes and its complications: an emerging pandemic. European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation. 2009; 16: 677-683.
108. Boulton, A. J. M., Armstrong, D. G., Löndahl, M., Frykberg, R. G., Game, F. L., Edmonds, M. E., ... & Mills, J. L. New evidence-based therapies for complex diabetic foot wounds. Diabetes Care. 2022; 45: S1-S23.
109. Tomic-Canic, M., Burgess, J. L., O’Neill, K. E., Strbo, N., & Pastar, I. Skin microbiota and its interplay with wound healing. The American Journal of Clinical Dermatology. 2020; 21: 36-43.