RENASYS

Negative Pressure Wound Therapy

 

Contact us about RENASYS

RENASYSTo discover more about RENASYS please complete the

Enquiry Form

Form

RENASYS

About RENASYS

The Flexibility of RENASYS

We know that every wound, every clinician and every budget is different. That’s why the RENASYS range can be tailored to meet your needs, giving you the flexibility to select the NPWT that’s right for you and your patients.

For Healthcare Professionals

  • Flexibility – the comprehensive RENASYS foam and gauze dressing range enables you to treat the most challenging wounds
  • Power and capacity – the RENASYS EZ PLUS device delivers extra capacity for the management of large highly exuding wounds
  • Ease of use – every RENASYS device is designed for intuitive operation

For Budget Holders

  • Budget – RENASYS offers flexible and tailored business packages to enable you to choose the package that’s right for your facility
  • Administration – streamlined logistics simplify the day to day management of NPWT For Patients
  • Mobility – portable RENASYS GO is designed for daily living
  •  Comfort – the unique RENASYS Soft Port provides a soft, cushioned channel that enhances patient comfort during therapy

 

RENASYS EZ Plus and RENASYS Go

 

 

 

 


References

1 Vuerstaek JD et al., State-of-the-art treatment of chronic leg ulcers: A randomized controlled trial comparing vacuum-assisted closure (V.A.CTM.) with modern wound dressings. J Vasc Surg. Nov 2006;44(5):1029-1037.

2 Deroo K. Outcomes of a portable single use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy trial. Poster presented at the WUWHS Congress, Yokohama, September 2012

3 Krug E et al., Evidence-based recommendations for the use of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy in traumatic wounds and reconstructive surgery: steps towards an international consensus. Injury. February 2011;42 Suppl1:S1-12

4 Apelqvist J, Armstrong DG, Lavery LA, Boulton AJ. Am J Surg. Jun 2008;195(6):782-788. Epub 2008 Mar 26. Economic analysis based on Armstrong et al clinical study

5 Birke-Sorensen H et al., Evidence-based recommendations for Negative Pressure Wound Therapy: treatment variables (pressure levels, wound filler and contact layer)--steps towards an international consensus. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. Sep 2011;64:S1-S16

6 Lavery LA et al., A comparison of diabetic foot ulcer outcomes using Negative Pressure Wound Therapy versus historical standard of care. Int Wound J. Jun 2007;4(2):103-113

7 Hurd T. Outcomes of a portable single use negative pressure device trial. Symposium, EWMA conference, Vienna, Austria. May 2012

8 Llanos S et al., Effectiveness of negative pressure closure in the integration of split thickness skin grafts: a randomized, double-masked, controlled trial. Ann Surg. Nov 2006;244(5):700-705

9 SRS/CT09/02. A prospective, open, non-comparative, multi-centre study to evaluate the functionality and dressing performance of a new Negative Pressure Enhanced Dressing (NPED) in acute wounds. Dharma H. March 2011

10 Hurd T, Chadwick P, Cote J, et al., Impact of gauze based NPWT on the patient and nursing experience in the treatment of challenging wounds. Int. Wound J. Dec 2010;7(6):448-455

11 Canonico S et al., Therapeutic possibilities of portable NPWT. Initial multi-disciplinary observation with the negative pressure therapy device. Acta Vulnol. Jun 2012;10:57-66

 

TM Trademark of Smith & Nephew
TM All trademarks acknowledged

Mode of Action

Mode of Action