• Login |
• Contact Us |
• Other ConvaTec Websites

• PRODUCTS
• WOUND & SKIN
• OSTOMY
• FECAL MANAGEMENT
• CORPORATE

Overcoming the challenges

In a non-comparative study there was a significant reduction in mean wound area from 10.1cm2 at baseline to 5.1cm2 at four weeks (p<0.001) and healed in five subjects (11%)1*
	Baseline mean wound size (ulcer area)1	Final evaluation mean wound size (ulcer area)1
50% decrease in mean wound area from baseline to final evaluation.*
In a wound area measurement study, the healing rates at 4 weeks were powerful predictors of complete wound healing at 12 weeks.2
*Using protocols of care that included Versiva® XC® dressing with sustained graduated compression bandages.

Challenge	Retention of fluid and lateral spread
Maceration of periwound skin is a common complication.3 Some dressings absorb exudate within their “air pocket structure” which is released when pressure is applied, potentially causing maceration.4
	Allevyn® NA cross section	Allevyn® dressing*
	Mepilex® cross section	Mepilex® dressing*

Solution
Because Versiva® XC® dressing contains Hydrofiber® Technology, the unique gelling action locks in fluid,5 preventing it spreading laterally, retaining it, even under pressure.6 In vitro testing of Versiva®XC® dressing compared to traditional foam dressings (Allevyn® and Mepilex®) demonstrated its superior retention capability, with more than 90 percent of fluid retained within the dressings under a 40 mmHg load (p<0.05).6 Photo used with the kind permission of nurses Esperanza Manzanero and Salomé Fernández. This photo represents one wound and may not be typical of all wounds.
	Versiva® XC® cross section	Versiva® XC® dressing*
	*In an in vitro test a 5 kg weight was applied to each saturated dressing (equivalent to 40 mmHg pressure).6

Versiva^® XC^® dressing maintains moisture within the dressing for a longer period than other dressings tested.¹⁰*

Challenge	Contours11, 12
Dressings that do not contour to the wound bed may leave dead space.4 Versiva® XC® dressing contains Hydrofiber® Technology, which conforms closely to the wound surface, helping to minimize dead space where bacteria can thrive as demonstrated by in vitro testing.11,12 *Depiction of a simulated exuding wound environment.
	Versiva® XC® dressing* Hydrofiber® Technology minimizes dead space	Allevyn® dressing* Dead space

References [+]

1. Vanscheidt W, Munter KC, Klovekorn W Vin F, Gauthier JP, Ukat A . A prospective study on the use of a non-adhesive gelling foam dressing on exuding leg ulcers. J Wound Care. 2007;16(6):261-265.
2. Cardinal M, Eisenbud D, Phillips T, Harding K. Early healing rates and wound area measurements are reliable predictors of later complete wound closure. Wound Repair Regen. 2008;16: 19-22.
3. World Union of Wound Healing Societies (WUWHS). Principles of Best Practice: Wound Exudate and the Role of Dressings. A Consensus Document. London: MEP Ltd, 2007.
4. Best Practice Statement: Optimising the use of Versiva^® XC^® gelling foam dressing. Wounds UK, Aberdeen, 2009.
5. Waring MJ, Parsons D. Physico-chemical characterisation of carboxymethylated spun cellulose fibres. Biomaterials. 2001;22:903-912.
6. Griffiths B, Adams S, Kelly S, Shaw H. Retention of fluid and lateral spread in a new gelling foam dressing versus other foam dressings. Poster presented at: 20th Annual Symposium on Advanced Wound Care and the Wound Healing Society Meeting; April 28-May 1, 2007; Tampa, FL.
7. A Comparison Of Moisture Balance At a Simulated Wound Dressing/Wound Bed Interface Between Versiva^® XC^® and foam dressings WHRI3248 TA176.
8. Lin Y, Chen J, Li Q, Pan K. Moisture vapor transmission rates of various transparent dressings at different temperatures and humidities. Chin Med J. 2009;122(8):927-930.
9. Retention of fluid under compression of non-adhesive versions of Versiva^® XC^® vs. Allevyn^®, Biatain^® and Mepilex^®. WHRI2932 TA110. November 28, 2006. Data on file, ConvaTec.
10. Comparison of the performance characteristics of Versiva^® XC™ against foam dressings. WHRI2720 AI127. November 22, 2006. Data on file, ConvaTec.
11. A new method to demonstrate intimate contact with a simulated wound bed of Versiva^® XC^® dressings versus foam dressings. WHRI2938 TA111. December 11, 2006. Data on file, ConvaTec.
12. Jones SA, Bowler PG, Walker M. Antimicrobial activity of silver-containing dressings is influenced by dressing conformability with a wound surface. Wounds. 2005;17:263-270. sequestration and bactericidal activity within hydrating Hydrofiber® wound dressings. Biomaterials. 2006;27:1129-1139.