Home > Journals > Acta Vulnologica > Past Issues > Acta Vulnologica 2011 June;9(2) > Acta Vulnologica 2011 June;9(2):53-63





A Journal on Physiopathology and Therapy of Chronic Cutaneous Ulcers

Official Journal of the Italian Association for Cutaneous Ulcers
Indexed/Abstracted in: EMBASE, Scopus, Emerging Sources Citation Index




Acta Vulnologica 2011 June;9(2):53-63

language: English, Italian

Preliminary results of experimental research on a technique for measuring skin ulcer lesions

Crisci A. 1, Moccia G. 2, Malinconico F. A. 2, Foroni F. 2, Agresti E. 2, Galietta G. 2, Villaccio G. 2, Esposito F. 2, Falzarano A. 1, Colella C. 1, Gaetano F. 1, Casucci G. 1, Agresti M. 1

1 Casa di Cura S.Francesco Telese Terme, Benevento, Italy
2 Tenth Division of General Surgery and Oncologic Fisiopathology, Department of Anesthesiology, Surgery and, Emergency, Università of Naples School of Medicine, Naples, Italy


AIM:The purpose of the present research was to find a simple, inexpensive way (namely not requiring costly equipment) to diagnose and measure a skin ulcer, through experimental research that led us to work on the real area of the ulcer.
METHODS:Various ulcers were examined and mathematical calculations carried out. One hundred and ninety skin lesions (trophic, vascular ulcers etc.) were examined during a study period of five years (2004-2009). Lesions were first photographed before being subjected to geometric examination and mathematical and statistical calculations.
RESULTS:These tests allowed to find out that there is no statistically significant difference between the values of AR and ARI °C (P=0.144) and AR and ARII °C (P=0.018), with a probability index of 0.05, although the equality is greater between AR and ARI°C (variance: P=0.144, t-test: P=2, χ2: P=1.000) which would suggest the greater utility of ARI °C compared to ARII °C for evaluating the wound surface, instead of AR with a probability index of 0.05, although equality is greater between AR and ARI°C (variance: P=0.144, t-test: P=2, χ2: P=1.000) which would lead us to assume the greater utility of ARI°C compared to ARII°C for evaluating the wound surface instead of AR.
CONCLUSION: From the above we can conclude that by increasing by 14.81% the value of ARI°C we obtain the AR value of the lesion with a much faster calculation. It is therefore very easily repeatable in case of doubt or suspicion.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail