Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_764_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
30.08.2026
Размер:
47 Мб
Скачать
174
https://t.me/medicina_free
E. Ricci
Surg. 2011;29(2):109–14. https://doi.org/10.1089/
pho.2009.2680; Epub 2011 Jan 9.
28. Leclère FM, Puechguiral IR, Rotteleur G, Thomas P, Mordon SR. A prospective randomized study of 980nm diode laser-assisted venous ulcer healing on 34 patients. Wound Repair Regen. 2011;19(1):116.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524- 475X.2010.00637.x;
Epub 2010 Oct 19.
29. Taradaj J, Franek A, Blaszczak E, Polak A, Chmielewska D, Krol P, Dolibog P. Using physi­cal modalities in the treatment of venous leg ulcers: a 14-year comparative clinical study. Wounds. 2012;24(8):215–26.
30. Kajagar BM, Godhi AS, Pandit A, Khatri S.Efcacy of low level laser therapy on wound healing in patients with chronic diabetic foot ulcers—a randomised con­trol trial. Indian J Surg. 2012;74(5):359–63.
31. Moskvin SV, Geynitz AV, Askhadulin EV. Efciency of a new combined laser therapy in patients with tro-
phic ulcers of lower extremities and chronic venous insufciency. J Lasers Med Sci. 2017;8(3):132–5.
https://doi.org/10.15171/jlms.2017.24.
32. Vitse J, Bekara F, Byun S, Herlin C, Teot L.A double­blind, placebo-controlled randomized evaluation of the effect of low-level laser therapy on venous leg ulcers. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2017;16(1):29–35.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1534734617690948; Epub
2017 Feb 17.
33. Fonseca Santos JA, Barbosa Dias Campelo M, Alencar de Oliveira R, Amadei Nicolau R, Araújo Rezende VE, Loschiavo Arisawa EA. Effects of low-power light therapy on the tissue repair process of chronic wounds in diabetic feet. Photomed Laser Surg. 2018;36(6):298–304.
34. Bavaresco T, De Fátima LA.Low-laser light therapy in venous ulcer healing: a randomized clinical trial. Rev Bras Enferm. 2021;75(3):e20210396.
Treatment ofChronic Wounds
https://t.me/medicina_free
andUlcers withFocused andDefocused Shock Waves
RaoululSaggini, RosaGraziaBellomo, andAndreaSaggini
18
18.1 Introduction
Chronic soft tissue wounds pose a therapeutic challenge, and the problems arise from a combi­nation of factors, the most important being the outpatient setting, treatment cost, duration, and patient/nursing staff compliance with dressing systems. The outpatient problem cannot be solved by the physician alone, but it is a product of wound chronicity and the resulting extraneous decision-making factors (reduction of hospital beds, cost of hospitalization, and insurance cov­erage policies) that lead to patient discharge after primary treatment attempts. The focus in manag­ing chronic soft tissue wounds is directed toward reducing costs and duration, as well as simplify­ing treatment modalities in the outpatient/extra­mural setting.
R. u. Saggini (*) Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Ecampus University, Novedrate, Italy
R. G. Bellomo Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Carlo Bò University, Urbino, Italy
A. Saggini Dermatology and Pathological Anatomy, Friburg, Germany e-mail: raoul.saggini@eunicampus.it
18.2 Shock Waves
Shock waves are mechanical and repetitive stim­uli with high energy that are similar to acoustic waves, capable of stimulating the biological heal­ing of both acute and chronic pathological tissues [1]. They are impulsive phenomena with a rapid rise time and a slightly slower descent, followed by a nal readaptation around the zero line. They are transient disturbances that propagate in three dimensions and are characterized by an advanc­ing front that falls into the category of acoustic waves. The treated tissue is subjected to repeated high-intensity pressure stimuli [2]. Shock waves are acoustic waves that possess properties such as high pressure exceeding 400 megapascals, rapid rise time almost vertical, below 10 billionths of a second, and a short life span below 10 ms with a characteristic rise and negative descent phase that is typical for all shock wave generators but varies among different types of generators [3]. Today, through advances in basic sciences, we know the real effect of shock waves on living tissues, and these effects can be achieved with signicantly lower energy treatment protocols that are better tolerated and free of signicant side effects, mak­ing them applicable in the treatment of ulcers. All this ts into the mechanism of regenerative medicine.
The treatment consists of a succession of shock waves at regular intervals, but there are also interferences between successive stimula-
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Maruccia et al. (eds.), Pearls and Pitfalls in Skin Ulcer Management,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45453-0_18
175
176
https://t.me/medicina_free
R. u. Saggini et al.
tions [4]. It should be noted that shock waves propagating in a medium at approximately the speed of sound have later stimuli that tend to have a slightly higher speed than the rst stimuli, resulting in a partial summation of effects. Additionally, phenomena such as reection, refraction, and diffraction should be considered, as they determine mutual interference between the emissions of stimuli at different times. The physical or biological reactions that occur are of three types. The rst reaction has direct effects on the interface, meaning that when the wave front passes between two media with a signicant den­sity difference, a high amount of energy is released [5]. The second reaction occurs through the formation of vapor bubbles in the liquids crossed by shock waves. Inside the bubbles, there is a negative pressure that tends to induce col­lapse when new shock waves reach them. The bubbles then deform in an ellipsoidal direction until they implode, resulting in a jet of water trav­eling at a speed over 23 times the speed of sound [6]. The third reaction is a physical-biological reaction, specically mechanotransduction, where shock waves passing through the tissue cause high-pressure gradients of approximately 160 megapascals per square millimeter. Pressure, tension, and shear forces stimulate cell irritation due to the mechanical deformation of the cyto­skeleton [7]. Thus, various signicant biochemi­cal processes are triggered, leading to intrinsic healing of the affected cellular structures [8].
18.3 Aspects ofTechnology
There are three technologies for the production of focused and defocused waves that, in different ways, determine a physical stimulation that is completely overlapping among them. The elec­trohydraulic generator consists of a water-lled ellipsoid with a rst focal point called F1, con­sisting of two electrodes placed 1mm apart. The high voltage generated between these two elec­trodes creates a vapor bubble that expands inside the ellipsoid, causing a pressure wave with the characteristics of a shock wave. This wave is reected by the internal walls of the ellipsoid to
an external point called F2, which represents the treatment area. The electrohydraulic technology generates a strong potential difference with the discharge of a spark and is capable of creating a gas bubble that expands extremely rapidly in a spherocentric manner, with a specic focal point formation. It does not rely on a membrane that needs to be moved, there is no inertia to over­come, and it is very fast and more manageable in its focusing. It retains less energy near zero while waiting for another shock wave of the same type and power to be generated. In this case, it is not a markedly negative wave, which is a disruptive aspect of the signal related to the specic charac­teristics of the electromagnetic generator and the membrane used [9].
The electromagnetic generator, on the other hand, can be found in either a at coil or cylindri­cal coil variant, but its operation is identical. The coil is coated with a metal membrane that, when current passes through it, expands and generates the shock wave, which is then focused outside the device due to reection. The electromagnetic technology works by delivering a signal to the loudspeaker, which magnetically excites the coil in a magnetic eld, causing it to move back and forth, pushing the loudspeaker’s membrane. This process generates the shock wave. In this case, the membrane is cylindrical and placed around the coil, which oscillates back and forth to trans­mit the vibration to the parabola that concentrates the energy into a focal point.
The piezoelectric generator instead exploits the ability of piezoelectric crystals to contract or expand when subjected to a strong electric volt­age. In this case, a large number of crystals are placed on the inner surface of a semispherical shell, and the individual stimulations of the crys­tals are all directed toward the focal point, where the stimuli are summed up and the shock wave is generated. The piezoelectric technology has an emitter with a concavity where thousands of piezoelectric crystals are placed and where the electric current is generated in the quartz. The quartz crystals oscillate very rapidly and form this pressure wave, which is not a true shock wave. However, as the pressure waves are focused by the bell, as they approach the focal point, their
18 Treatment ofChronic Wounds andUlcers withFocused andDefocused Shock Waves
https://t.me/medicina_free
177
peaks come closer together. When the peaks coincide at a point called the focal point, that is where the shock wave is formed. This results in an extremely small focal point.
The essential parameters for establishing the characteristics to be administered for each ses­sion of shock wave treatment are (1) the ux den­sity measured in millijoules per square millimeter, representing the estimation of the energy or force delivered per pulse; (2) the number of pulses administered, which depends on the pathology being treated and the size of the anatomical struc­ture; and (3) the frequency, i.e., the number of pulses per second, which can be adjusted to dif­ferent frequencies ranging from a minimum of 1 Hertz to a maximum of 8 Hertz. It should be noted that there are focal-type generators that can generate a defocused shock wave, which is par­ticularly useful in the eld of wound care and skin treatment [10, 11].
18.4 The Biological Stimulus
oftheShock Wave
In this regard, it should be noted that the concept of mechanotransduction needs to be introduced, which correlates with the fact that mechanical stimuli can induce biological reactions in target cells, similar to the active ingredient in a drug. This is a pathway to which many types of cells are sensitive: This mechanical stimulation is per­ceived by the extracellular environment and translated into biochemical responses capable of inuencing many cellular functions such as migration, proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis. Many cellular structures are involved in these phenomena, including stretch-activated ion channels, integrins and cadherins, growth factor receptors, known as gap junctions, and endocellular organelles. The cell membrane also undergoes the effect of the shock wave at specic therapeutic dosages, resulting in increased permeability.
The neovascularization effect of shock wave treatment is also of interest, as it induces an early effect known as transient vasoplegia, due to a sympathicoplegic effect directly induced in the
pre-capillary sphincters. This is followed by a subsequent delayed effect involving the endothe­lial cell-stimulating angiogenesis factor (ESAF), a low-molecular-weight peptide capable of acti­vating collagenase, which acts on the basement membrane of the vessel wall. This creates con­tinuous solutions on the basement membrane itself and triggers the migration of endothelial cells, directly initiating a process of neoangio­genesis. These signicant effects can be corre­lated with the results obtained in the stimulation of skin affected by diabetic vascular ulcers, chronic pressure ulcers, brosis, and retracting scars. The main targets of shock waves appear to be the membranes, leading to increased permea­bility of cell membranes and walls, making it a potential additional treatment in infected condi­tions. It has been discovered that high-energy shock waves possess antibacterial activity, which can have clinical relevance in reducing bacterial growth [12].
Methods developed in recent decades have shown a signicant reduction in wound size and accelerated healing, but also a lack of complete epithelialization. Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) has been shown to promote wound closure and complete epithelialization through neovascularization, mainly driven by endothelial cell proliferation and vasculogenesis. When the wound begins to heal, cells proliferate and build granulation tissue that is highly perme­ated by capillaries. Subsequently, during epitheli­alization, scar tissue is formed. Shock waves have been shown to accelerate granulation and reepithelialization while reducing scar formation. Shock waves increase the overall blood circula­tion of the affected areas and stimulate cutaneous and muscular microcirculation. They recruit endothelial progenitor cells and enhance the expression of angiogenic factors such as VEGF or TGF-beta, as well as nitric oxide, a potent vasodilator. Shock waves strongly promote tissue regeneration cascades, particularly the activation of TGF-beta1 and type 1 and type 3 collagens, which are major factors involved in tissue repair processes. They also stimulate broblast prolif­eration and the metabolism of the extracellular matrix [13].
178
https://t.me/medicina_free
After demonstrating the dose-effect rela­tionship of shock waves, it is suggested that for invitro cell treatment, optimal parameters are an intensity between 0.10 and 0.13 mj/ mm2 and a number of pulses between 200 and
300. For chronic ulcers invivo, it is suggested to use a number of pulses between 600 and 1000, repeated five times at a 7-day interval, with an intensity between 0.10 and 0.13 mj/ mm2.
Infection of chronic wounds is a significant challenge during wound treatment, as micro­bial colonization sustains inflammation and impairs the healing process. Shock waves have been reported to have a bactericidal effect and can reduce bacterial load in the affected tissue.
Chronic wound infection poses a signicant challenge during wound treatment, as microbial colonization sustains inammation and compro­mises the healing process. It has been reported that shock waves have a bactericidal effect and are capable of reducing the bacterial load in the affected tissue. Another positive benecial aspect of shock waves is that they increase the number of microvessels and improve the sys­temic administration of antibiotics to the infected wound.
The negative effects of chronic inammation are suppressed with shock wave treatment alone, leading to improved wound healing with better tissue perfusion and increased blood vessel for­mation. Difcult-to-heal and chronic wounds show signicant improvement after treatment, with a low recurrence rate.
The treatment is clinically effective, non­invasive, and well-tolerated by patients, and it does not require anesthesia. It is cost-effective and easily applicable in an outpatient setting.
In summary, the use of low-energy focused and defocused extracorporeal shock wave ther­apy (ESWT) on a large patient population with acute and chronic soft tissue wounds has demon­strated its suitability in achieving complete clo­sure of the majority of wounds (see illustrations in Figs. 18.1, 18.2, 18.3, 18.4, 18.5, 18.6, 18.7 and 18.8).
R. u. Saggini et al.
Fig. 18.1 Patient 55 year old with chronic cutaneous ulcers on the Achilles tendon after post-surgical infection. Before treatment VAS=5
Fig. 18.2 After ve treatments with 1000 pulses at 0.13 mj/mm2 ESWT VAS=2
Fig. 18.3 Patient 58 year old with pain related to chronic vascular arterial ulcer on lateral malleolus. Before treat­ment VAS=6
18 Treatment ofChronic Wounds andUlcers withFocused andDefocused Shock Waves
https://t.me/medicina_free
179
Fig. 18.4 After ve treatments with 1000 pulses at 0.12 mj/mm2 ESWT VAS=2
Fig. 18.5 Patient 70 year old with pain related to chronic cutaneous ulcer on Achilles tendon. Before treatment VAS=5
Fig. 18.6 After ve treatments with 1000 pulses at 0.12 mj/mm2 ESWT VAS=0
Fig. 18.7 Patient 62 year old with chronic cutaneous ulcers related to venous insufciency. Before treatment VAS=7
Fig. 18.8 After ve treatments with 1000 pulses at 0.12 mj/mm2 ESWT VAS=3
References
1. Saggini R, etal. Extracorporeal shock wave therapy: an emerging treatment modality for retracting scars of the hands. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2015;42:185. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2015.07.028.
2. Omar MT, Gwada RF, Shaheen AA, Saggini R. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy for the treat­ment of chronic wound of lower extremity: cur­rent perspective and systematic review. Int Wound J. 2017;14(6):898–908. https://doi.org/10.1111/
iwj.12723; Epub 2017 Feb 15. Review.
3. Saggini R, Di Stefano A, Saggini A, Bellomo RG. Clinical application of shock wave therapy in musculoskeletal disorders: part II related to myo­fascial and nerve apparatus. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2015;29(4):771–85.
180
https://t.me/medicina_free
R. u. Saggini et al.
4. Larking AM, Duport S, Clinton M, Hardy M, Andrews K.Randomized control of extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus placebo for chronic decubitus ulcer­ation. Clin Rehabil. 2010;24:222–9.
5. Wang C-J, et al. Extracorporeal shockwave treat­ment for chronic diabetic foot ulcers. J Surg Res. 2009;152:96–103.
6. Dumfarth J, et al. Prophylactic low-energy shock wave therapy improves wound healing after vein harvesting for coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a prospective, randomized trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;86:1909–13.
7. Wolff KS, et al. The inuence of comorbidities and etiologies on the success of extracorporeal shock wave therapy for chronic soft tissue wounds: midterm results. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2011;37:1111–9.
8. Ottomann C, et al. Prospective randomized phase Il trial of accelerated reepithelialization of supercial second-degree burn wounds using extracorporeal shock wave therapy. Ann Surg. 2012;255:23–9.
9. Arno A, et al. Extracorporeal shock waves, a new non-surgical method to treat severe burns. Burns. 2010;36:844–9.
10. Wang C-J, Ko J-Y, Kuo Y-R, Yang Y-J. Molecular changes in diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011;94:105–10.
11. Leal C et al. Shock wave medicine and leprosy: the ultimate challenge for skin regeneration by mechano­transduction. Abstract ISMST congress milan. 2014.
12. Saggini R, Bellomo RG, Valentina P, Figus A, Troccola A, Saggini A, Scuderi N. La terapia con ESWT a specica focalizzazione nella gestione riabil­itativa delle ferite difcili. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2009;45(S):1–3; ISSN: 1973-9087.
13. Saggini R, Figus A, Troccola A, Coco V, Saggini A, Scuderi N. Extracorporeal shock wave therapy for management of chronic ulcers in the lower extremi­ties. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2008;34(8):1261–71; ISSN: 0301-5629.
Hydrosurgery inWound Care
https://t.me/medicina_free
FerdinandoCampitiello
19
The concept of water-jet debridement (hydrosur­gery) is a fundamental evolution of traditional wound cleansing, used for ages on acute wounds and, more recently, on chronic ones.
Hydrosurgery consists of tissue removal through a water jet used as a dissection tool to complete the procedure, thanks to which the sur­geon is able to aim precisely at the damaged necrotic tissues, sparing the healthy ones. This modality represents a better alternative for proce­dures that involve soft-tissue debridement.
The effect produced is a consequence of water irrigation, which physically removes foreign bodies, debris, and other non-anchored material from the wound. The more rapid and intense irri­gation, the more intense the energy transferred to the tissues and, as a consequence, the larger the debridement.
Various technologies have been developed in this eld, and many devices have been produced. Some have a milder effect, and others are so pow­erful that they can be compared to some surgical instruments [1]. Less aggressive options can be used to remove necrotic tissue, slough, biolm,
F. Campitiello (*) Department of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Naples, Campania, Italy e-mail: ferdinando.campitiello@unicampania.it
and other material without a stable structure, with weak consistency and can be easily removed. The most powerful options, especially those that use the “Venturi effect,” are able to precisely disen­tangle brotic and compact tissues and may sometimes also be used on bony structures, according to the rapidity and intensity of the jet going through the tip of the tool [2]. The preci­sion and versatility of this type of device are so exible that they allow application in different settings and conditions, ranging from venous ulcers to post-surgical diabetic wounds. The angled tip of the instrument allows to perform debridement in narrow spaces and pockets where debridement through scissors or blade can be challenging [3].
Hydro-jet debridement signicantly reduces operative time when compared to traditional methods. Moreover, the quality of debridement is incredibly high. Chronic cutaneous lesions may require more than one session of traditional debridement to obtain an acceptable wound bed. Through hydrosurgery, instead, a single debride­ment session is often sufcient to reach an opti­mal wound bed [4] signicantly reducing healing time. Another interesting aspect of this technol­ogy is the possibility to combine antiseptic solu­tions to maximize antimicrobial action, which is fundamental during debridement procedures. It is possible to combine hydrosurgery with superoxi­dized solutions or solutions containing poly­hexanide (PHMB): Both have a neutral pH, are
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Maruccia et al. (eds.), Pearls and Pitfalls in Skin Ulcer Management,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45453-0_19
181
182
https://t.me/medicina_free
F. Campitiello
non-toxic for tissues, and perform against all types of infected materials. In particular, hydro­surgery devices can act as physical and biological debriding tools [5]. The only possible limitation of this technology is that it can be painful for the patient; therefore, it should be restricted to cases in which optimal pain management is available, for example, through local anesthesia [6].
Another issue is the assumption that the water jet might spread bacteria, due to the for­mation of aerosol during use. This could con­tribute to contamination of the surgical site [7]. Although questionable, this raises awareness on the importance of adequate staff training. Physicians in charge should not only be prop­erly trained, but also have a support system that includes regular control of incidence of nosoco­mial infections. It is possible to avoid air con­tamination by using dedicated cuffs or protection devices capable of reducing aerosol diffusion. Cost-effectiveness and costs of the equipment for hydrosurgery vary according to the different technologies, but are generally higher than those of other solutions, especially due to the cost of single-use materials. On the other side, the advantages of being a rapid, precise, and effec­tive technique make hydrosurgery so appalling and suitable for complex wound that need to be debrided, possibly in a single session under local anesthesia. Therefore, indication repre­sents the main point concerning the cost-to­benet ratio: When used correctly, hydrosurgery
is considered cost-effective thanks to the reduc­tion in hospital management costs and, in some cases, in hospital stay [7].
References
1. Brown LL, Shelton HT, Bornside GH, Cohn I Jr. Evaluation of wound irrigation by pulsatile jet and conventional methods. Ann Surg. 1978;187:170–3.
2. Granick MS, Tenenhaus M, Knox KR, Ulm JP. Comparison of wound irrigation and tangential hydrodissection in bacterial clearance of contaminated wounds: results of a randomized, controlled clinical study. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2007;53(4):64–70.
3. Caputo WJ, Beggs DJ, DeFede JL, etal. A prospec­tive randomised controlled clinical trial comparing hydrosurgery debridement with conventional surgical debridement in lower extremity ulcers. Int Wound J. 2008;5:288–94.
4. Yuan M, Yin M, Zhang L, Feng J, Zhu J, Zhou Z, Shu B, Zhou F, Zhang F, Yin H, Wang X, Qi S, Wu J.Selective debridement of burn wounds using hydro­surgery system. Int Wound J. 2020;17(2):300–9.
https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.13270; Epub 2019 Nov
29.
5. Draeger RW, Dahners LE.Traumatic wound debride­ment: a comparison of irrigation methods. J Orthop Trauma. 2006;20:83–8.
6. Gravante G, Delogu D, Esposito G, Montone A.Versajet hydrosurgery versus classic escharectomy for burn débridment: a prospective randomized trial. J Burn Care Res. 2007;28:720–4.
7. Bowling FL, Stickings DS, Edwards-Jones V, et al. Hydro debridement of wounds: effectiveness in reducing wound bacterial contamination and poten­tial for air bacterial contamination. J Foot Ankle Res. 2009;8:13.
Ultrasound inWound Care
https://t.me/medicina_free
AlessandroScalise, OrtensiaPirro, CesareFoggetti, MarinaPierangeli, MatteoTorresetti, andGiovanniMariaDi Benedetto
20
20.1 Introduction
The use of ultrasound for medical applications, including diagnostics, surgery, and therapy, has been investigated for decades. It is traditionally widely used in imaging medicine for the purpose of medical diagnosis. In 1927, it was discovered that ultrasound produces lasting changes in bio­logical systems, and this represents the starting point for the application of ultrasound in the ther­apeutical eld.
Initially, all the attention was focused on the thermal effects of ultrasound, mainly to selec­tively raise the temperature of particular tissues; recently, it shifted to its non-thermal effects, which led to a variety of therapeutical applica­tions, such as angiogenesis, bone healing, soft tissue regeneration, inammation modulation, physiotherapy, and gene therapy.
The biological effects induced by ultrasound are various and depend on the exposure levels
used. At low levels, benecial and reversible cel­lular effects may be produced, whereas at high intensities instantaneous cell death is sought. Therapeutical ultrasound can be broadly divided into “low-power” and “high-power” applications that cause, respectively, reversible and non­reversible effects on target tissues. The “low­power” group effects include tissue healing, angiogenesis, bone healing, inammation modu­lation, physiotherapy, and gene therapy, whereas the therapies based on “high-power” ultrasound in medicine known as high-intensity-focused ultrasound (HIFU) are used for oncological pur­poses and lithotripsy.
In this chapter, we will focus on the low-power group and mainly on the use of this type of ultra­sound in the treatment of difcult wounds also evaluate the effects that this therapy generates on tissues, on the inammatory process, and on wound healing. Although numerous benets of ultrasound therapy have been clinically con­rmed, much remains to be discovered about the mechanism of action of this therapy.
A. Scalise (*) · O. Pirro · C. Foggetti · M. Pierangeli
· M. Torresetti · G. M. Di Benedetto Medical School, Marche Polytechnique University, Ancona, Italy e-mail: alessandro.scalise@ospedaliriuniti.marche.it;
marina.pierangeli@ospedaliriuniti.marche.it; matteo.torresetti@ospedaliriuniti.marche.it; giovanni.dibenedetto@ospedaliriuniti.marche.it
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 M. Maruccia et al. (eds.), Pearls and Pitfalls in Skin Ulcer Management,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-45453-0_20
20.2 Device Characteristics
The ultrasound machine (Fig.20.1) is a medical device composed of:
183