Comparative effectiveness of mechanically and electrically powered negative pressure wound therapy devices: A multicenter randomized controlled trial
- 4 May 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Wound Repair and Regeneration
- Vol. 20 (3), 332-341
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-475x.2012.00780.x
Abstract
This study was designed to compare the ultraportable mechanically powered Smart Negative Pressure (SNaP) Wound Care System (Spiracur, Sunnyvale, CA) with the electrically powered Vacuum-Assisted Closure (VAC) Therapy System (Kinetic Concepts, Inc. [KCI], San Antonio, TX) in a multicenter, comparative efficacy, noninferiority-powered, randomized controlled trial. We enrolled 132 people with noninfected, nonischemic, nonplantar lower extremity diabetic and venous wounds. Each subject was randomly assigned (1:1) to treatment with either system in conjunction with appropriate off-loading and compression therapy. The trial evaluated treatment for up to 16 weeks or complete wound closure (defined as complete reepithelialization without drainage). Primary end point analysis of wound size reduction found that SNaP-treated subjects demonstrated noninferiority to the VAC-treated subjects at 4, 8, 12, and 16 weeks (p = 0.0030, 0.0130, 0.0051, and 0.0044, respectively). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference in complete wound closure between SNaP- and VAC-treated subjects at all time points. Device related adverse events and complications such as infection were also similar between treatment groups. These data support similar wound healing outcomes between the SNaP system and the VAC system in the population studied.Keywords
This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparison of negative pressure wound therapy with an ultraportable mechanically powered device vs. traditional electrically powered device for the treatment of chronic lower extremity ulcers: A multicenter randomized‐controlled trialWound Repair and Regeneration, 2011
- Evaluation of Chronic Wound Treatment with the SNaP Wound Care System versus Modern Dressing ProtocolsPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2010
- Influence on pressure transduction when using different drainage techniques and wound fillers (foam and gauze) for negative pressure wound therapyInternational Wound Journal, 2010
- The SNaP System: Biomechanical and Animal Model Testing of a Novel Ultraportable Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy SystemPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2010
- Human skin wounds: A major and snowballing threat to public health and the economyWound Repair and Regeneration, 2009
- Psychological factors in leg ulceration: a case-control studyBritish Journal of Dermatology, 2009
- A randomised controlled trial of a community nursing intervention: improved quality of life and healing for clients with chronic leg ulcersJournal of Clinical Nursing, 2009
- Clinical outcome of diabetic foot ulcers treated with negative pressure wound therapy and the transition from acute care to home careInternational Wound Journal, 2008
- Vacuum–assisted closure of wounds and anxietyScandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery, 2008
- State-of-the-art treatment of chronic leg ulcers: A randomized controlled trial comparing vacuum-assisted closure (V.A.C.) with modern wound dressingsJournal of Vascular Surgery, 2006