Skip to content

SALACIA: SALvesAn vs Conventional Management of dIAbetic Foot Wounds

SALACIA: Randomised Control Trial of SALvesAn Neutral Electrolysed Water Versus Conventional Management of Non-healing dIAbetic Foot Wounds

Status
Not yet recruiting
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06908148
Acronym
SALACIA
Enrollment
200
Registered
2025-04-03
Start date
2025-07-01
Completion date
2026-09-01
Last updated
2025-04-03

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Foot Ulcers, Diabetic, Foot Ulcer Unhealed

Keywords

Foot Ulcers, Diabetic, Wound Healing, Electrolysed Water

Brief summary

Increasing prevalence of diabetes mellitus has led to increasing numbers of chronic non-healing foot ulcers (wounds). Electrolysed water is a novel antiseptic which reduces bacterial load and appears to encourage wound healing. The investigators propose to compare electrolysed water against conventional management.

Detailed description

Increasing prevalence of diabetes mellitus has led to increasing numbers of chronic non-healing foot ulcers (wounds). These wounds are colonised with pathogens, including multi-drug resistant organisms. Despite repeated courses of antibiotics, subsequent management is difficult due to devascularisation of surrounding tissues and healing failures. Ultimately, patients may require amputation. Electrolysed water is a novel antiseptic produced by passing an electric current through a mixture of tap water and salt. Microbiocidal activity is due to the presence of hypochlorous acid at neutral Ph. Irrigation of chronic wounds reduces bacterial load and appears to encourage wound healing. The investigators propose to compare electrolysed water against conventional management. Patients who attend NHS podiatry clinics, and who enrol in the trial, will receive treatment of their wounds as-per routine care; the only difference is the irrigant used. Patients will be randomised to use either the in-use product (Prontosan™) or electrolysed water (Salvesan). The inclusion criteria are: * Adult diabetic patients (18-89 years) * Chronic wounds (present for \>=3 weeks since commencing Podiatry care) * Non-healing (wounds that, in the view of the patient's Podiatrist, are not responding to standard treatment) * Wounds that are \>=5mm when measured in any direction The treatment phase will last for 12 weeks (or less, if complete healing achieved). All patients will be followed up at 20 weeks to assess recurrence. Primary composite end-point defined as time to complete healing or proportion achieving \>50% healing if complete healing is not achieved. Primary objective is to compare rapidity of wound healing. Secondary endpoints are surgical intervention, debridement, amputation, patient death. Improved healing could potentially benefit patients who might otherwise progress to amputation. The investigators will monitor antimicrobial consumption in study patients throughout the trial. A final objective is to carry out an economic evaluation of electrolysed water vs Prontosan in the routine management of non-healing foot ulcers.

Interventions

Electrolysed water is a novel antiseptic produced by passing an electric current through a mixture of tap water and salt. Microbiocidal activity is due to the presence of hypochlorous acid at neutral Ph. Irrigation of chronic wounds reduces bacterial load and appears to encourage wound healing. We propose to compare electrolysed water against conventional management.

DEVICEConventional irrigant

The irrigant (Prontosan™) that is currently 'in-use' in the conventional management of diabetic foot wounds

Sponsors

NHS Lanarkshire
Lead SponsorOTHER_GOV

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Randomised control trial to compare electrolysed water against conventional management of non-healing diabetic foot wounds

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 89 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Adult diabetic patients (18-89 years) * Chronic wounds (present for \>=3 weeks since commencing Podiatry care) * Non-healing (wounds that, in the view of the patient's Podiatrist, are not responding to standard treatment) * Wounds that are \>=5mm when measured in any direction

Exclusion criteria

* Patients lacking capacity to provide informed consent * Patients with underlying terminal disease * Patients with severe comorbidities, e.g. morbidly obese; uncontrolled diabetes (HbA1c \> 97 mmol/mol); gangrene; chronic leg oedema/venous disease; end-stage renal disease; untreatable ischaemic heart disease; HIV; etc. * Women who are pregnant or breastfeeding will be excluded from this trial. * Women of child-bearing potential who are not using an acceptable form of contraception will be excluded from this trial.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Proportion of diabetic foot ulcers (wounds) that heal when irrigated using electrolysed water versus the proportion that heal when using the standard-of-care irrigantFrom enrollment to 20 weeksThis investigation seeks to determine whether irrigation of non-healing diabetic foot ulcers (wounds) using neutral electrolysed water (Salvesan) results in equivalent, or better, wound healing than the standard-of-care wound management irrigant (Prontosan® Solution). The primary outcome measure is the condition of the wound at the end of the study, with composite end-points defined as: (A) - for wounds that heal completely within the 12-week follow up period, the associated time to completely heal (B) - for wounds that do not completely heal, the number with \>50% healing of initial lesion at 12 weeks (defined as surface area in mm2 as measured using the standard methodology used within the Diabetic Podiatry service). The proportions of wounds that heal \[(A)- completely / (B) - with \>50% healing\] using each irrigant will be compared statistically to assess whether there is any difference in the proportion healed using electrolysed water versus standard-of-care irrigant.

Contacts

Primary ContactMichelle Lewis
michelle.lewis@aqualution.co.uk+44(0)1361 883575
Backup ContactStephanie Dancer, MD
stephanie.dancer@lanarkshire.scot.nhs.uk+44(0) 1355585000

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026