According to a commentary, the results are more encouraging than findings for most interventions that have been reported to date. It suggests that although the results of a full health economic analysis are awaited, it is evident that sucrose octasulfate dressing is easy to apply, and apart from the dressing itself, there should not be any additional costs. It notes however that the generalisability of the use of this dressing remains to be confirmed as the definition of neuroischaemic wounds is not altogether clear, and the study seems to have been done with a very few patients per centre (median 3 over 3-year period), suggesting study participants might not have been representative of most patients in these centres. It adds that in contrast, the 2016 report of the National Diabetes Foot Audit of England and Wales noted 20% of ulcers were located on the heel, 43% were infected, and 52% were less than 1 cm2, all of which were exclusion criteria in this study. Therefore, a sucrose octasulfate dressing might not necessarily be suitable for all diabetic foot ulcers. Despite these caveats, the commentator believes that these dressings seem to be a “promising addition to current treatment strategies for diabetic foot ulcers positioned away from the heel, which have not shown a significant reduction in area despite good offloading and other best practice treatments and where patients also have peripheral arterial disease that is not being considered for vascular intervention.”