2 June 2020

New study: Smith+Nephew PICO System cost effective vs traditional negative pressure in prevalent leg and foot ulcers

Smith+Nephew (LSE:SN, NYSE:SNN), the global medical technology business, is excited to announce the publication of a health economic study in Wound Management and Prevention, which states that the use of PICO Single Use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy System (sNPWT) is estimated to be highly cost effective when compared with traditional NPWT (tNPWT), and may therefore provide opportunity to reduce the economic burden of venous leg ulcers (VLUs) and diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs).1

Expected cost savings per patient of using PICO sNPWT vs tNPWT were $18,504 for DFUs and $14,113 for VLUs at week 26.1

The study results are being released at the outset of the Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses Society annual conference, WOCNext 2020, being held online.

The economic model used data from a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial (RCT) to estimate wound closure rates.*2 The study demonstrated superior clinical outcomes of PICO sNPWT vs tNPWT in the management of patients with lower extremity ulcers with a longer than 4 weeks duration over 12 weeks.2 In an economic model, for both ulcer types combined, switching from tNPWT to PICO sNPWT resulted in an expected cost saving per patient of $15,749 and 5.31 open ulcer weeks per patient over 26 weeks, and a 31% increase in percentage of expected closed ulcers.1

In the United States alone, chronic wounds affect 6 million people, with increasing numbers anticipated in growing elderly and diabetic populations.3 One study showed that DFUs alone are estimated to cost the US health system between $9 to $13 billion.4 These wounds can be managed with tNPWT,5 but it can be costly, complex to use and limit patient mobility.6,7

“Tools that decrease skyrocketing healthcare costs and improve patient’s quality of life are always needed for wound care patients. The novel and inventive technology of the PICO system does both,” said Dr. Cyaandi Dove D.P.M., co-author of the 2019 RCT. “The PICO system should be embraced by wound care practitioners for its ease of use, effective outcomes and improved patient satisfaction.”

The unique PICO sNPWT dressing includes the proprietary AIRLOCK Technology for uniform and consistent delivery of therapeutic NPWT across the wound and peri-wound area.8 By minimizing the need for fillers and reducing dressing change frequency compared with traditional NPWT2, PICO sNPWT helps healing to progress undisturbed, contributing to faster time to healing, improved quality and distribution of granulation tissue and more consistent re-epithelialization.9

PICO sNPWT has a strong evidence base with 137 published papers of which 26 are published RCTs and health economic evaluations, and 79 are unique clinical studies.10

To learn more about PICO sNPWT see www.smith-nephew.com/kirsner





Kirsti Harefallet






* n=161, † p<0.001 for wound area and p=0.014 for depth, ‡ in-vivo testing



For detailed product information including indications for use, contraindications, precautions and warnings please consult the product’s applicable Instructions for Use (IFU) prior to use. In the United States PICO 7 sNPWT is not indicated for use with compression therapy.



About Smith+Nephew

Smith+Nephew is a portfolio medical technology business that exists to restore people’s bodies and their self-belief by using technology to take the limits off living. We call this purpose ‘Life Unlimited’. Our 17,500+ employees deliver this mission every day, making a difference to patients’ lives through the excellence of our product portfolio, and the invention and application of new technologies across our three global franchises of Orthopaedics, Advanced Wound Management and Sports Medicine & ENT.

Founded in Hull, UK, in 1856, we now operate in more than 100 countries, and generated annual sales of $5.1 billion in 2019. Smith+Nephew is a constituent of the FTSE100 (LSE:SN, NYSE:SNN). The terms ‘Group’ and ‘Smith+Nephew’ are used to refer to Smith & Nephew plc and its consolidated subsidiaries, unless the context requires otherwise.

For more information about Smith+Nephew, please visit www.smith-nephew.com and follow us on TwitterLinkedIn, Instagram or Facebook.

To learn more about how we can help you get CLOSER TO ZERO delay in wound healing, please visit www.closertozero.com


Forward-looking Statements

This document may contain forward-looking statements that may or may not prove accurate. For example, statements regarding expected revenue growth and trading margins, market trends and our product pipeline are forward-looking statements. Phrases such as "aim", "plan", "intend", "anticipate", "well-placed", "believe", "estimate", "expect", "target", "consider" and similar expressions are generally intended to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from what is expressed or implied by the statements. For Smith+Nephew, these factors include: economic and financial conditions in the markets we serve, especially those affecting health care providers, payers and customers; price levels for established and innovative medical devices; developments in medical technology; regulatory approvals, reimbursement decisions or other government actions; product defects or recalls or other problems with quality management systems or failure to comply with related regulations; litigation relating to patent or other claims; legal compliance risks and related investigative, remedial or enforcement actions; disruption to our supply chain or operations or those of our suppliers; competition for qualified personnel; strategic actions, including acquisitions and dispositions, our success in performing due diligence, valuing and integrating acquired businesses; disruption that may result from transactions or other changes we make in our business plans or organisation to adapt to market developments; and numerous other matters that affect us or our markets, including those of a political, economic, business, competitive or reputational nature. Please refer to the documents that Smith+Nephew has filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission under the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including Smith+Nephew's most recent annual report on Form 20-F, for a discussion of certain of these factors. Any forward-looking statement is based on information available to Smith+Nephew as of the date of the statement. All written or oral forward-looking statements attributable to Smith+Nephew are qualified by this caution. Smith+Nephew does not undertake any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement to reflect any change in circumstances or in Smith+Nephew's expectations.

◊ Trademark of Smith+Nephew. Certain marks registered US Patent and Trademark Office.

  1. Kirsner RS, Delhougne G, Searle RJ. A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing single-use and traditional negative pressure wound therapy to treat chronic venous and diabetic foot ulcers. Wound Manag Prev. 2020;66(3):30–38.

  2. Kirsner R, Dove C, Reyzelman A, Vayser D, Jaimes H. A Prospective, Randomized, 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 Rep Regen. 2019. 2019;27(5):519-529

  3. Powers JG, Higham C, Broussard K, Phillips TJ. Wound healing and treating wounds: Chronic wound care and management. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;74(4):607-25.

  4. Raghav A, Khan ZA, Labala RK, Ahmad J, Noor S, Mishra BK. Financial burden of diabetic foot ulcers to world: a progressive topic to discuss always. Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab. 2018;9(1):29‐31.

  5. Birke-Sorensen H, Malmsjo M, Rome P, 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. 2011;64 Suppl:S1-16.

  6. Hurd T, Trueman P, Rossington A. Use of a portable, single-use negative pressure wound therapy device in home care patients with low to moderately exuding wounds: a case series. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2014;60(3):30-36.

  7. Hurd, T; Evaluating the costs and benefits of innovations in chronic wound care products and practices; Ostomy Wound Management Supplement June 2013.

  8. Smith & Nephew October 2017. Project Opal PICO 7 System Stability Testing, Initial Time Point. Internal Report. DS/17/253/R.

  9. Brownhill R, Bell A, Hart J, Webster I & Huddleston E. Pre-clinical Assessment of a No-canister, Ultra-portable, Single use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (sNPWT) System* in a Porcine Model of Wound Healing: Unlocking its Mode of Action. Poster presented at the Advanced Wound Care (SAWC) Conference, 7-11 May 2019, San Antonio, Texas.

  10. Smith+Nephew 2020. Evidence Pyramid April 2020. EA/AWM/PICO/030/v1.