Wound-care monitoring of chronic wounds healing using lidar technology in patients with diabetic foot syndrome
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11603/2414-4533.2026.2.16065Keywords:
diabetic foot, chronic wound, wound healing, diagnostics, three-dimensional imaging, laser scanningAbstract
The aim of the work: to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility of LiDAR technology in wound monitoring among patients with diabetic foot-associated chronic ulcers.
Materials and Methods. 50 patients with chronic wounds (lasting more than 4 weeks), classified according to the Wagner and Texas systems, were examined. Wound morphometry was performed using four methods: linear measurement, planimetry, digital photogrammetry, and LiDAR scanning. Wound area, volume, and surface topography were assessed; inter-observer agreement (ICC), systematic measurement bias, and 4-week healing dynamics were analyzed.
Results. LiDAR demonstrated the highest accuracy and reproducibility (ICC=0.972), outperforming photogrammetry (0.914), planimetry (0.853), and linear measurements (0.781). Linear measurement showed the greatest systematic overestimation of wound area (-1.45 cm² compared to LiDAR). After 4 weeks, the mean wound area measured by LiDAR decreased from 11.42 to 7.86 cm², while photogrammetry recorded 8.31 cm² and linear measurement 8.92 cm². Weekly wound-area regression was highest with LiDAR (5.3 %), compared with 4.8 % for photogrammetry and 3.2 % for linear measurement. LiDAR demonstrated the lowest measurement error, highest stability, and greatest sensitivity to minimal geometric changes, making it a valuable tool for early detection of both improvement and deterioration in chronic wound healing. Traditional contact-based methods proved less accurate due to variability, operator dependence, and limited reproducibility.
Conclusions. LiDAR is a highly accurate, reproducible, and clinically meaningful method for chronic wound monitoring and may be integrated into standardized management algorithms for diabetic foot ulcers.
References
Armstrong DG, Tan TW, Boulton AJM, Bus SA. Diabetic foot ulcers: a review. JAMA. 2023; 330(1):62-75. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.10578. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023.10578
Akkus G, Sert M. Diabetic foot ulcers: a devastating complication of diabetes mellitus continues non-stop in spite of new medical treatment modalities. World J Diabetes. 2022; 13(12):1106-21. DOI: 10.4239/wjd.v13.i12.1106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4239/wjd.v13.i12.1106
Jiang P, Li Q, Luo Y, Luo F, Che Q, Lu Z, et al. Current status and progress in research on dressing management for diabetic foot ulcer. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023; 14:1221705. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1221705. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2023.1221705
World Health Organization. Technical briefing for Appendix 3 of the Global Action Plan for Non-Communicable Diseases: Diabetes interventions. [Internet]. Available from: https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/ncds/mnd/technical-brief-diabetes.pdf?sfvrsn=5b304706_8.
International Diabetes Federation (IDF). Diabetic Foot. [Internet]. Available from: https://idf.org/europe/life-with-diabetes/diabetes-related-complications/diabetic-foot.
Fourati Kallel I, Kammoun JK, Lajnef H, Ben Ali S. Intelligent progress monitoring of healing wound tissues based on classification models. Biomed Phys Eng Express. 2025; 11(3). DOI: 10.1088/2057-1976/adc137. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/2057-1976/adc137
Lucas Y, Niri R, Treuillet S, Douzi H, Castaneda B. Wound size imaging: ready for smart assessment and monitoring. Adv Wound Care. 2021; 10(11):641-61. DOI: 10.1089/wound.2018.0937.
Pisano G, van Oosterom MN, Ottens VA, Berrens AC, Slof LJ, Çakal BA, et al. Back-table specimen scanning using gantry-free hybrid hSPECT/LiDAR imaging: a feasibility study during PSMA-radioguided surgery. SURG ENDOSC. 2025; 39(10):6943-54. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-025-12081-w. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-025-12081-w
Massini F, Ebert L, Ampanozi G, Franckenberg S, Benz L, Sieberth T. Comparison of superficial wound documentation using 2D forensic photography, 3D photogrammetry, Botscan© and VR with real-life examination. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2021; 17(3):422-30. DOI: 10.1007/s12024-021-00393-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-021-00393-x
Bai X, Zhang H, Jiao Y, Yuan C, Ma Y, Han L. Digital health interventions for chronic wound management: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2024; 26:e47904. DOI:10.2196/47904. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/47904
Song B, Kim J, Kwon H, Kim S, Oh SH, Ha Y, et al. Smartphone-based LiDAR application for easy and accurate wound size measurement. J Clin Med. 2023; 12(18):6042. DOI: 10.3390/jcm12186042. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12186042
Shah P, Inturi R, Anne D, Jadhav D, Viswambharan V, Khadilkar R, et al. Wagner's classification as a tool for treating diabetic foot ulcers: our observations at a suburban teaching hospital. Cureus. 2022; 14(1):e21501. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.21501. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.21501
Jeon BJ, Choi HJ, Kang JS, Tak MS, Park ES. Comparison of five systems of classification of diabetic foot ulcers and predictive factors for amputation. Int Wound J. 2017; 14(3):537-45. DOI: 10.1111/iwj.12642. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12642
Sibbald RG, Ayello EA. Total contact cast for diabetic foot ulcers: an underused “gold standard.” Adv Skin Wound Care. 2019; 32(6):247. DOI: 10.1097/01.ASW.0000558272.10192.c5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ASW.0000558272.10192.c5
Likuvannya syndromu diabetychnoyi stopy. Ministerstvo okhorony zdorovʺya Ukrayiny. Nastanova 00497 [Treatment of diabetic foot syndrome. Ministry of Health of Ukraine. Guideline 00497]. [Internet]. Available from: https://guidelines.moz.gov.ua/documents/3333. Ukrainian.
Lucas Y, Niri R, Treuillet S, Douzi H, Castaneda B. Wound size imaging: ready for smart assessment and monitoring. Adv Wound Care. 2021; 10(11):641-61. DOI: 10.1089/wound.2018.0937. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/wound.2018.0937
Wendelken ME, Berg WT, Lichtenstein P, Markowitz L, Comfort C, Alvarez OM. Wounds measured from digital photographs using photodigital planimetry software: validation and rater reliability. Wounds. 2011; 23(9):267-75.
Zaporozhan VM, Aryayev ML. Bioetyka ta biobezpeka [Bioethics and Biosafety]. Kyyiv. Zdorovʺya. 2013; 456. Ukrainian.
Antomonov M.YU. Matematychna obrobka ta analiz medyko-biolohichnykh danykh. 2-e vyd. [Mathematical processing and analysis of medical and biological data. 2nd ed.]. Kyyiv. Medinform. 2018; 579. Ukrainian.
George D, Mallery P. IBM SPSS Statistics 29 Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference. 18th ed. London: Routledge; 2024. 440 p. ISBN: 9781032621937. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781032622156
Motulsky HJ. Advice: When to plot SD vs. SEM. In: GraphPad Statistics Guide. [Internet]. Available from: http://www.graphpad.com/guides/prism/10/statistics/index.htm?statwhentoplotsdvssem.htm. Accessed 2025 Nov. 16.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Петро Муравйов, Олександр Шаханов, Олексій Васильєв, Костянтин Кравець
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish their work in Hospital Surgery. Journal by L. Ya. Kovalchuk agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
