‡ In these countries please contact our distributor


Challenge delayed healing1,2 in hard-to-heal deep3,4 wounds*

We have made a number of improvements to our existing PICO Single Use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy System (sNPWT) technology, to further enhance performance and optimise wound healing treatment1,5, even in deep wounds3,4**.

New PICO 14 sNPWT has an enhanced pump to facilitate use in large wounds with less user intervention6

PICO sNPWT has been shown to improve patient outcomes compared to standard dressings and traditional negative pressure (tNPWT)1,7,2***, whilst reducing cost compared to standard care1,7.



The PICO 14 system has been designed to challenge hard to heal wounds with:

  Designed for use on deep wounds3,4
  A pump duration of up to 14 days11.
  Enhanced pump to facilitate treatment in large wounds with less user intervention**6.


The PICO System  may help simultaneously achieve improved wound contraction1 and reduce costs by optimising dressing changes, compared to standard care7


Proprietary technology to address hard-to-heal wounds

 PICO 14 System uses the same innovative technology as PICO 7 with features including:

  The PICO System may help wound contraction in deep, open wounds.  With an appropriate NPWT filler, it helps to stimulate developments of granulation tissue to facilitate wound closure3*.
  Use in hard-to-seal or awkward places10, with an integrated dressing leak indicator. Designed to improve patient experience with a quieter pump and integrated belt clip for portability12,13****.
  ‘Dressing full’ change indicator and integrated ‘start date’ note area helps support efforts to reduce the cost of unnecessary dressing changes and patient visits5*****.
  The PICO Dressing, with AIRLOCK Technology,  distributes pressure evenly across the entire wound surface for optimal performance11,14.



Clinically effective for the treatment of acute15-18 and chronic1,2 wounds, and surgically closed incision sites15. Helping you get CLOSER TO ZERO surgical site complications.


Diabetic foot ulcer (with foam wound filler)

PICO 14 dressing removal (with presence of wound filler)



View application videos and clinical evidence resources >

PICO 14 size chart and ordering information >

Relieving the pressure of wound therapy.

The unique 4-layered design of PICO sNPWT offers a number of simultaneous actions to assist in the quality and speed of wound healing7,16,20.


  • Protects against contamination21
  • May help to hold incisions by reducing tensile force22.
  • May help to improve perfusion, compared to standard dressings14.
  • Reduces seroma, compared to standard dressings23.
  • NPWT has been shown to help reduce oedema, compared to standard care24-26.

  For further information or guidance, please contact us.


For effective, easy-to-use traditional negative pressure wound therapy (tNPWT)

The RENASYS™ tNPWT system addresses the clinical need for traditional negative pressure wound therapy across a wide range of acute, chronic and surgical wound types.


For other patient requirements, consider: 

ALLEVYN Wound Dressing

ACTICOAT Antimicrobial Barrier Dressings
IODOSORB 0.9% Cadexomer Iodine products MolecuLightTM i:X Imaging Device

Safety and Electromagnetic Compatibility Information

Please click on your country to download your EMC data


  • English 
  • Denmark
  • Finland
  • France
  • Germany
  • Greece
  • Italy
  • Netherlands
  • Poland
  • Norway
  • Portugal
  • Spain
  • Sweden
  • Turkey  

    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.

    *19 case studies. Wound depths 2-7cm.
    **compared to previous versions of PICO sNPWT.
    ***n=161; Intention to treat analysis, at 12 weeks p ≤ 0.003; combined population
    ****compared to PICO version 1.6
    ***** Reduction per patient of 1-2 outpatient visits over 12 treatment period and 1-3 home visits per week. n=4

    i)Malmsjö M. et al. Biological effects of a disposable, canisterless Negative Pressure Wound Therapy system. Eplasty 2014; 14:e15.
    ii)Smith & Nephew January 2019. Summary report of in-vitro wound model and negative pressure delivery (nominal 80mmHg) testing for PICO v2 (PICO 7 and PICO 14) system. Internal Report. RD/18/134.
    iii)Smith & Nephew April 2018. Summary of Routine QA Testing Conducted on the Moisture Vapour Permeability of the PICO Dressing. Internal Report DS/18/153/R.
    iv)Data on file reference 1102010 – Bacterial Barrier Testing (wet-wet) of PICO Dressing with a 7 day Test Duration against S. marcescens; Helen Lumb, February 2011.
    v)Data on File. DS/17/253/R. Project Opal PICO 7 System Stability Testing – Initial Time Point. October 2017.
    vi) Smith & Nephew October 2018. Low Allergy adhesive Claims PICO Softport Dressings and PICO Secondary Fixation Strips. Internal Report. PSS330.





    1) Dowsett C, Hampton J, Myers D, Styche T. Use of PICO to improve clinical and economic outcomes in hard-to-heal wounds. Wounds International. 2017;8, p53–58.
    2) Kirsner R, Dove C, Reyzelman A, Vayser D, Jaimes H. A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial 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, e-published ahead of print. May 2019.
    3) Smith & nephew 2018. The review of evidence supporting the use of PICO in wounds ≥2cmin depth. Internal report EO AWM. PCS230.001 v2.
    4) Smith & Nephew December 2018. Deeper Wounds Report PICO v2 (PICO 7 and PICO 14) Devices. Internal Report. RD/18/089 V2.
    5) Sharpe A, Myers D, Searle R. Using single use negative pressure wound therapy for patients with complicated diabetic foot ulcers: an economic perspective. Wounds UK. 2018; 14:80-84. Available at: Wounds UK.
    6) Smith & Nephew 2019. Research & Development Report. PICO 14 and PICO 7 Initial Pump Down and Maintenance Pump Down Time Outs RD/19/084.
    7) Hampton J. Providing cost-effective treatment of hard-to-heal wounds in the community through use of NPWT. Br J Community Nurs. 2015; 20:S14–S20.

    8) Smith & Nephew February 2019. Changes in wound dimensions for lower limb chronic wounds: PICO vs traditional negative pressure wound therapy at 4 and 12 weeks. Internal Report. EO/AWM/PICO/005/v1.

    9) Smith & Nephew December 2018. PICO 14 Service Life Testing: 14-Day Device Lifespan. Internal Report. RD/18/132.
    10) Data on file report OR-DOF/42. A volunteer trial to assess dressing performance of Palermo (PICO) multisite vs control. March 2014.
    11) Smith & Nephew January 2019. Summary Report of In-Vitro Wound Model and Negative Pressure Delivery (nominal 80mmHg) Testing for PICO v2 (PICO 7 and PICO 14) System. Internal Report RD/18/134.
    12) WMP.11446.UEF/R3 Project Fairbanks Human Factors Summary Report Issue 2. R. Knight, August 2016.
    13) Data on file, reference DS/17/701/R2: Acoustic Testing Report: Comparison of PICO 7 to PICO 1.6 devices. January 2018.
    14) Malmsjö M. et al. Biological effects of a disposable, canisterless Negative Pressure Wound Therapy system. Eplasty 2014; 14:e15.

    15) Saunders C et al. The incidence of surgical site complications with PICO single-use negative pressure wound therapy compared to conventional dressings when used prophylactically on closed surgical incisions: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. February 2019.
    16) Strugala V and Martin R. Meta-analysis of comparative trials evaluating a prophylactic single-use negative pressure wound therapy system for the prevention of surgical site complications. Surgical Infections 2018; 18 (7):810-819. DOI: 10.1089/sur.2017.156.
    17) Galiano R.D., Hudson D, Shin J, et al. Incisional negative pressure wound therapy for prevention of wound healing complications following reduction mammoplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2018;6:e1560; doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000001560; Published online 12 January 2018.
    18) Data on file reference 1102010 – Bacterial Barrier Testing (wet-wet) of PICO Dressing with a 7 day Test Duration against S. marcescens; Helen Lumb, February 2011.
    19) Loveluck J et al. Biomechanical modelling of forces applied to closed incisions during single-use negative pressure wound therapy. Eplasty 2016; 16e20.
    20) Pellino G et al. Prophylactic Negative Pressure Wound Therapy in colorectal surgery. Effects on surgical site events: current status and call to action, Updates Surg 2015; DOI 10.10007/s 13304-015-0298-z.
    21) Shim HS, Choi JS, Kim SW.A Role for Postoperative Negative Pressure Wound Therapy in Multitissue Hand Injuries. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:3629643.
    22) Scalise A, Calamita R, Tartaglione C, et al.Improving wound healing and preventing surgical site complications of closed surgical incisions: a possible role of Incisional Negative Pressure Wound Therapy. A systematic review of the literature. Int Wound J. 2016;13(6):1260-1281.
    23) 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.
    24) Canonico S. et al. Therapeutic possibilities of portable NPWT. Initial multidisciplinary observation with the negative pressure therapy device. Acta Vulnol Issue 2, 2012; 10: 57-66.

    PICO 7

    Learn more

    PICO 7Y

    Learn more

    Contact us about RENASYS

    Request a demo