Global

‡ In these countries please contact our distributor

Infection

Infection can stall the healing process1

High bioburden/wound infection can lead to a prolonged inflammation in a wound creating a cycle of inflammation  and tissue damage, subsequently the wound enters chronic state and fails to heal1,2


IODOSORB and IODOFLEX reduce bioburden3-8

  • Provides broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity for up to 72 hours (in vitro3
  • Reduction in wound bioburden 4-7and infection4-6
  • Controlled release of Cadexomer Iodine 0.9% concentration: effective, sustained antimicrobial activity8,9 and reduced toxicity10


Evidence

Paper Study type Results
Skog E, et al.6 RCT of IODOSORB vs. standard care in treatment-resistant VLUs Statistically significant decrease (p<0.001) in S. aureus and a significantly greater cleansing effect (p<0.005) in VLUs vs. controls
Danielsen L, et al.10 VLUs colonised with P. aeruginosa 65% (11/17) were culture negative after 1 week of treatment
Schwartz J, et al.7 Cohort study of DFU patients Statistically significant median reduction in the bacterial load over a 6 week period (p=0·025) as well as at 3 weeks (p=0·049) vs. baseline

Johnson11

Non-comparative cohort study using IODOSORB powder or ointment Complete healing and elimination of infection was achieved in 80% patients. Wounds cleared of mixed faecal flora, S. aureus, Group G beta haemolytic streptococci and Pseudomonas aeruginosa between 4–8 days treatment
Lindsay12 Randomised optional cross over study IODOSORB (CI) vs. standard treatment CI. treatment resulted in elimination or decrease of organisms in most cases, and this was associated with improvement of the ulcer.
Reduction in odour of the CI. treated ulcers was mostly associated with elimination of coliforms, although this improvement was also correlated with the elimination of S. aureus.
Hillstrom13
Multicentre crossover RCT of Iodosorb vs. standard treatment in VLUs

Significant reduction in S. aureus in the IODOSORB group
In the patients who switched from standard treatment to cadexomer iodine mean ulcer size reduced gradually.

Miller14 RCT comparing IODOSORB and ACTICOAT™ in VLUs 63% of wounds compromised by bioburden at presentation went on to heal within 12 weeks
Moss15 Randomised optional cross over study of IODOSORB vs. dextranomer in treatment-resistant VUs No significant difference in healing between treatment groups, but there was a statistically significant preference for IODOSORB vs. dextranomer based on cross over (p<0.01)

References
1. Edwards R and Harding KG. Curr Opin. Infect. Dis. 17, 91–96 (2004).
2. Menke NB, et al. Clin. Dermatol. 25, 19–25 (2007);
3. Salman H, Leakey A. Report number 194-03-01 (2001).
4. Sundberg J, Meller R. Wounds. 9:68-86 (1997).
5. Ormiston MC, Seymour MTJ, Venn GE, et al., In: Fox JA, Fischer H, eds. Cadexomer Iodine. New York, NY: F.K. Schattauer Verlag; 63-69 (1983).
6. Skog E, Arnesjo B, Troeng T, et al., Br J Dermatol.109:77-83.(1983).
7. Schwartz, J. a et al., Int. Wound J. 10, 193–9 (2013).
8. Harrow, J. 6763/IODOSORB/TECHMON/GLOBAL/0404. (2009).  Report number 194-03-01 (2001).
9. Zhou LH, et al., Br. J. Dermatol. 146, 365–74. (2002).
10. Danielsen L, et al. J Wound Care 1997; 6(4):169-172.
11. Johnson A. Professional Nurse, 1991. October: 60-64.
12. Lindsay G, et al. Acta Therapeutica 1986;12:141-148.
13. Hilstrom L. Acta Chir Scan Suppl, 1988. 544:53-56.
14. Miller CN, et al. Wound Repair Regen. 2010;18:359–67.
15. Moss C, et al. Clin Exp Dermatol 1987;12(6):413-8.