A robotic venous leg ulcer system reveals the benefits of negative pressure wound therapy in effective fluid handling

We applied a market‐leading, single‐use negative pressure wound therapy device to a robotic venous leg ulcer system and compared its fluid handling performance with that of standard of care, superabsorbent and foam dressings and compression therapy. For each tested product, we determined a metrics o...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International wound journal 2024-02, Vol.21 (2), p.n/a
Main Authors: Orlov, Aleksei, Ciliberti, Marino, Somma, Rosa, Gefen, Amit
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
bioengineering laboratory testing
chronic wounds
Clinical medicine
Compression therapy
Design specifications
Edema
exudate management
Hypertension
Leg ulcers
Original
Patient satisfaction
Robotics
Skin
Standard of care
superabsorbent and foam dressings
Variance analysis
Wound healing
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We applied a market‐leading, single‐use negative pressure wound therapy device to a robotic venous leg ulcer system and compared its fluid handling performance with that of standard of care, superabsorbent and foam dressings and compression therapy. For each tested product, we determined a metrics of retained, residual, evaporated and (potential) leaked fluid shares, for three exudate flow regimes representing different possible clinically relevant scenarios. The single‐use negative pressure wound therapy system under investigation emerged as the leading treatment option in the aspects of adequate fluid handling and consistent delivery of therapeutic‐level wound‐bed pressures. The superabsorbent dressing performed reasonably in fluid handling (resulting in some pooling but no leakage), however, it quickly caused excessive wound‐bed pressures due to swelling, after less than a day of simulated use. The foam dressing exhibited the poorest fluid handling performance, that is, pooling in the wound‐bed as well as occasional leakage, indicating potential inflammation and peri‐wound skin maceration risks under real‐world clinical use conditions. These laboratory findings highlight the importance of advanced robotic technology as contemporary means to simulate patient and wound behaviours and inform selection of wound care technologies and products, in ways that are impossible to achieve if relying solely on clinical trials and experience.
ISSN:1742-4801
1742-481X
1742-481X
DOI:10.1111/iwj.14426