Careers News Investors
Home

AIUC

Benvenuto al XVII Congresso Nazionale AIUC

Benvenuto al XVII Congresso Nazionale AIUC

Fornire un'eccellente cura delle ferite... è possibile

Unisciti a noi all'AIUC di Torino dall'11 al 14 ottobre 2023 

Al nostro simposio parleremo di Cure Condivise nel Woundcare

Unisciti a noi all'AIUC di Torino dall'11 al 14 ottobre 2023 

Al nostro simposio parleremo di Cure Condivise nel Woundcare

EPUAP-hero-2023.png

Callout title goes here

Callout text goes here


Citations

*compared to baseline trajectory, n=52 wounds; p<0.006 
**The PICO◊ Single Use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy System (sNPWT) functions through a physical mode of action. All therapeutic effects described—such as reduction of biofilm, fluid removal, stimulation of lymphatic flow, and activation of cellular responses (e.g., fibroblast migration or angiogenesis)—are mechanically induced through the application of uniform negative pressure and compressive forces. These effects are not the result of biological, chemical, or pharmacological interactions, and should not be interpreted as such

 
  1. Dowsett C, Hampton K, Myers D, Styche T. Use of PICO to improve clinical and economic outcomes in hard-to-heal wounds. Wounds International. 2017;8(2):52-58.
  2. Casey C. Consistent delivery of therapeutic negative pressure levels by a single use negative pressure wound therapy system (sNPWT)* in a wound model. Paper presented at: EWMA; 2019; Gothenburg, Sweden.
  3. Smith+Nephew 2021.PICO™ Pressure Mapping Study. Internal Report. DS/19/211/R - Part B.
  4. Smith+Nephew 2020.Bacterial barrier testing of the PICO dressing. Internal Report. 2001002.
  5. Smith+Nephew July 2018.PICO 7Y Non-NPWT Wound Model Summary. Internal Report. DS.18.260.R.
  6. Mcmanus H, Woodmansey E. Bacterial retention within a multi-layered absorbent AIRLOCK™ Technology Single Use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (sNPWT) dressing. Paper presented at: EWMA; 2018; Krakow, Poland.
  7. Hudson DA, Adams KG, Van Huyssteen A, Martin R, Huddleston EM. Simplified negative pressure wound therapy: clinical evaluation of an ultraportable, no-canister system. Int Wound J. 2015;12(2):195-201.
  8. Kirsner R, Dove C, Reyzelman A, Vayser D, Jaimes H. A Prospective, Randomised, Controlled Clinical Trial on the Efficacy of a single-use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy System, compared to Traditional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy in the Treatment of Chronic Ulcers of the Lower Extremities. Wound Repair Regen. 2019;27(5):519 - 529.
  9. Smith+Nephew 2018.Summary of rountine QA testing on MVP of PICO dressings. 2018. Internal Report. DS/18/153/R.
  10. Smith+Nephew 2019.Use of Moisture Vapour Permeability* (MVP) and Moisture Vapour Transmission rate** (MVTR) data to support product claims referring to moist wound healing. Internal Report. EO.AWM.PCSgen.001.v2.
  11. Xia CY, Yu AX, Qi B, et al. Analysis of blood flow and local expression of angiogenesis associated growth factors in infected wounds treated with negative pressure wound therapy. Mol Med Rep. 2014;9(5):1749–1754.
  12. Ma Z, Shou K, Li Z, et al. Negative pressure wound therapy promotes vessel destabilization and maturation at various stages of wound healing and thus influences wound prognosis. Exp Ther Med. 2016;11(4):1307–1317.
  13. Kilpadi DV, Cunningham MR. Evaluation of closed incision management with negative pressure wound therapy (CIM): hematoma/seroma and involvement of the lymphatic system. Wound Repair Regen. 2011;19(5):588-596.
  14. Brownhill VR, Huddleston E, Bell A, et al. Pre-Clinical Assessment of Single-Use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy During In Vivo Porcine Wound Healing. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle). 2020;0(0):1
  15. Smith and Nephew 2022. RENASYS EDGE System Human Factors Summative Report Summary. Internal Report. CSD.AWM.22.071.
  16. Smith+Nephew: Accessing Clinically Relevant Healthcare Professional Outcomes Attributable to the Useability of Traditional NPWT within a Simulation Lab Environment Report. CSD.AWM.24.032
  17. Smith+Nephew Internal Report CSD.AWM.25.076
  18. Smith+Nephew internal report CSD.AWM.25.068
  19. Vallejo-Carmona, L. Structure guided negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT): personalised tissue biomodulation with an NPWT system in adults and older adults. Journal of Wound Care Vol 34, 2025;11
  20. Smith+Nephew 2025. Internal report CSD.AWM.25.038.
  21. Smith+Nephew 2025. Internal report CSD.AWM.25.037.
  22. Skog E, Arnesjo B, Troeng T, et al. A randomized trail comparing cadexomer iodine and standard treatment in the out-patient management of chronic venous ulcers. British Journal of Dermatology. 1983;109:77-83.
  23. Lantis JC. Cadexomer Iodine on a biofilm in diabetic foot ulcers: A Pilot study. Paper presented at: WUWHS; 2016; Florence.
  24. Hillstrom L. Iodosorb Compared to Standard Treatment in Chronic Venous Leg Ulcers - a Multicenter Study. Acta Chir Scand Suppl. 1988;544:53-56.
  25. Schwartz JA, Lantis JC, 2nd, Gendics C, et al. A prospective, non comparative, multicenter study to investigate the effect of cadexomer iodine on bioburden load and other wound characteristics in diabetic foot ulcers. Int Wound J.2013;10(2):193-199.
  26. Malone M, Schwarzer S, Radzieta M, et al. Effect on total microbial load and community composition with two vs six-week topical Cadexomer Iodine for treating chronic biofilm infections in diabetic foot ulcers. Int Wound J. 2019;16(6):1477-1486.
  27. Troeng T, Skog E, Arnesjo B, et al. A Randomised Multicentre Trial to Compare the Efficacy of Cadexomer Iodine and Standard Treatment in the Management of Chronic Venous Ulcers in Out-Patients. Stuttgart: Schattauer Verlag; 1983.
  28. Hansson C, Persson L-M, Stenquist B, et al. The effects of cadexomer iodine paste in the treatment of venous leg ulcers compared with hydrocolloid dressing and paraffin gauze dressing. International Journal of Dermatology. 1998;37(390-396).
  29. Harcup JW, Saul PA. A study of the effect of cadexomer iodine in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. The British Journal of Clinical Practise. 1986;40(9):360-364.
  30. Nherera LM, Trueman P, Roberts CD, Berg L. Silver delivery approaches in the management of partial thickness burns: A systematic review and indirect treatment comparison. Wound Repair Regen. 2017;25(4):707 - 721.
  31. Cuttle L, Naidu S, Mill J, Hoskins W, Das K, Kimble RM. A retrospective cohort study of Acticoat versus Silvazine in a paediatric population. Burns. 2007;33(6):701 - 707.
  32. Gago M, Garcia F, Gaztelu V, Verdu J, Lopez P, Nolasco A. A comparison of three silver-containing dressings in the treatment of infected, chronic wounds. Wounds. 2008;20(10):273 - 278.
  33. Smith+Nephew 2020. ACTICOAT Classic (ACTICOAT 3) PMCF Activity Summary Report. Internal Report. EO.AWM.PCS105.001.v2.
  34. Smith+Nephew 2020. ACTICOAT FLEX 3: PMCF Activity Summary Report. Internal report. EO.AWM.PCS105.003.v2.

Title

Text

Explore