The use of therapeutic ultrasound in venous leg ulcers: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Low-frequency ultrasound treatment of chronic venous ulcers. A placebo controlled trial of ultrasound therapy in chronic leg ulceration. Low-frequency ultrasound treatment of chronic venous leg ulcers in an outpatient therapy. Pulsed ultrasound does not improve healing of venous ulcers. A controlled trial of weekly ultrasound therapy in chronic leg ulceration. Application of various power densities of ultrasound in the treatment of leg ulcers.
To estimate the usefulness of therapeutic ultrasound for healing of venous leg ulcers.
                Eighty-one patients were included in this study. Patients in groups 1 and 2 were treated surgically. Patients in groups 3 and 4 were treated conservatively. Patients in groups 1 and 3 were additionally treated with the ultrasound (1 MHz, 0.5 W/cm(2)) once daily, six times a week for seven weeks.
                Comparison of the number of complete healed wounds indicated statistically significant differences between groups 1 and 4 (P = 0.03), 2 and 4 (P = 0.03), 3 and 4 (P = 0.03) in favour of groups 1, 2 and 3. Comparison of the other parameters also demonstrated more efficient therapy effects in groups 1, 2 and 3 than in group 4. There were no statistical differences in all examined parameters between groups 1, 2 and 3 (P > 0.05).
                The ultrasound is an efficient and useful method only in conservatively treated venous leg ulcers. There are no special reasons for application of the ultrasound in surgically treated patients. A well-conducted surgical operation is much more effective for a healing process than conservative pharmacological procedures. In a randomized controlled clinical trial, the properties of low-frequency ultrasound in the treatment of chronic venous ulcers were investigated. Thirty-eight patients with chronic ulcerations of the legs caused by chronic venous insufficiency were randomly assigned to receive either conventional therapy alone or conventional therapy plus additional 30 kHz ultrasound treatment. Patients with other conditions that may impair wound healing such as diabetes mellitus or arterial disease were excluded. The ultrasound treatment consisted of 10 minutes of foot bathing with application of 30 kHz ultrasound 100 mW/cm(2) three times a week. Response was evaluated with the use of planimetry of the ulcer area and compared with controls after 3 and 8 weeks. After 3 weeks of treatment (and to a greater extent after 8 weeks of treatment) the ultrasound group showed a markedly better response than the control group. Although the control group showed a mean decrease of 11% in the ulcerated area after 8 weeks, in the ultrasound group the mean ulcerated area decreased by 41% (p < 0.05). There were only mild side effects in some of the patients treated with ultrasound. In conclusion, application of low-frequency ultrasound may be a helpful treatment option in chronic venous leg ulcers. A controlled study of the effects of ultrasound on healing chronic leg ulcers was carried out in conjunction with standard treatment on 38 patients divided randomly into two groups. All patients received standard treatment (paste impregnated bandage and a self-adhesive elastic bandage plus placebo ultrasound or ultrasound (1.0 watt/cm2 at 1 MHz, for 10 min) twice weekly for 8 weeks. Percentage healed ulcer area and number of healed ulcers were compared after 2, 4, 6 and 8 weeks. There were no significant differences in the proportion of healed ulcers or ulcer area in the ultrasound group as compared with the placebo group. Low-dose ultrasound seems to be an effective method to enhance wound healing, particularly in chronic venous leg ulcers. The aim of our investigation was to examine the effect of 30 kHz low-dose ultrasound in local treatment of chronic venous leg ulcers, when added to conventional therapy of outpatients. Twenty-four patients with chronic ulcerations of the leg due to chronic venous insufficiency were randomised in placebo-controlled parallel groups in a single-blind clinical study. Patients were randomised to conventional therapy with topical application of hydrocolloid dressings and compression therapy or conventional therapy with additional ultrasound treatment for 12 weeks. The ultrasound treatment consisted of 10 min of footbathing, with application of 30 kHz continuous ultrasound 100 mW/cm2 three times a week. The ulcer area was measured by planimetry, using a millimeter grid before treatment and after 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 weeks of therapy. The ulcer radius and the daily ulcer radius reduction were calculated. Colour photographs of the ulcers were taken under standard conditions at the same time. After each treatment local findings and side effects were recorded. After 12 weeks of treatment the control group showed a mean decrease of 16.5% in the ulcerated area. In contrast the mean ulcerated area decreased by 55.4% in the ultrasound group (p<0.007). The daily ulcer reduction in the ultrasound-treated patients was 0.08 mm+/-0.04 mm and in the placebo patients 0.03 mm+/-0.03 mm. Patients recorded only minor side-effects such as a tingling feeling and occasionally pinhead-sized bleeding in the ulcer area. The application of low-frequency and low-dose ultrasound is a helpful treatment option in chronic venous leg ulcers, especially if they do not respond to conventional ulcer treatment. A controlled study of the effects of pulsed ultrasound was carried out in conjunction with a standard treatment for healing chronic leg ulcers on 44 patients divided randomly into two groups. All patients received standard treatment (paste impregnated bandage and a self-adhesive elastic bandage) plus placebo-ultrasound or pulsed ultrasound (1:9, 0.5 watt/cm2 at 1 MHz, for 10 min) 3 days a week for 4 weeks, thereafter twice weekly for 4 weeks and once weekly for the following 4 weeks. Percentage healed ulcer area and comparison of percentage healed ulcers were examined after 4, 8 and 12 weeks. There were no significant differences in the proportion of healed ulcers or ulcer area in the pulsed ultrasound group as compared with the placebo group. In a controlled trial to ascertain whether ultrasound given weekly in conjunction with a standard treatment for chronic leg ulcers improves the rate of healing 56 patients were randomised to standard treatment (paste impregnated bandage and a self-adhesive elastic bandage) and 52 to standard treatment plus pulsed ultrasound given weekly. After 12 weeks the proportion of ulcers healed was 20% greater in the ultrasound than in the control group. The objective of our study was to determine which ultrasound power density (0.5 W/cm(2) or 1 W/cm(2)) is more effective at reducing the area and volume of leg ulceration.
                A total of 65 patients with venous ulcers were randomly divided into three groups: A, B and C. In group A, 22 patients were treated with ultrasound rated at 1 W/cm(2) and with compressive therapy. In group B, 21 patients were treated with ultrasound rated at 0.5 W/cm(2) and with compressive therapy. In both groups the patients were treated with a pulsed wave of a duty cycle of 1/5 (impulse time=2 ms, pause time=8 ms) and frequency of 1 MHz. The 22 patients in group C (control group) were subjected to topical pharmacological treatment.
                We found a statistically significant reduction of the ulcer area, volume and linear dimensions in all three groups of patients. The ulcer area reduction rate was highest in group B. The volume reduction rate in group B was higher than in group A only. The rate of reduction of suppurate area was highest in group B.
                We have demonstrated that ultrasound rated at 0.5 W/cm(2) causes greater and faster changes in the healing process than ultrasound rated at 1 W/cm(2).
The trials evaluating US for venous leg ulcers are small, poor-quality and heterogeneous. There is no reliable evidence that US hastens healing of venous ulcers. There is a small amount of weak evidence of increased healing with US, but this requires confirmation in larger, high-quality RCTs. There is no evidence of a benefit associated with low frequency US.