Comparison of two dressings in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. Randomized trial of two foam dressings in the management of chronic venous ulceration. Monitoring the microcirculation to evaluate dressing performance in patients with venous leg ulcers. A comparison of two dressings in the management of chronic wounds. [A comparative study of the hydrocellular dressing Allevyn and the hydrocolloid dressing Duoderm in the local treatment of leg ulcers]. Use of a hydrocapillary dressing in the management of highly exuding ulcers: a comparative study. Randomised, comparative study of three primary dressings for the treatment of venous ulcers. Comparing a foam composite to a hydrocellular foam dressing in the management of venous leg ulcers: a controlled clinical study.
nan A multicenter prospective randomized clinical trial was undertaken to compare two foam dressings (Allevyn Hydrocellular, Smith & Nephew and Mepilex, Molnlycke Health Care AB) in the management of chronic venous leg ulceration. Patients were also randomized to two compression bandage systems (4-layer vs. cohesive short stretch) as a factorial design. Those with causes of ulceration other than venous disease were excluded. In all, 156 patients met the entry criteria and were randomized from the 12 clinical centers with a median (range) ulcer size of 4.33 (0.33-123.10) cm(2). After 24 weeks a total of 100 (64.1%) patients had complete ulcer closure, 46 (29.5%) had withdrawn from the trial, nine (5.8%) remained unhealed and one patient died. Of the patients randomized to Mepilex, 50/75 (66.7%) had complete ulcer healing compared with 50/81 (61.7%) on Allevyn. The hazard ratio for healing after adjustment for bandage type and trial center was 1.48 (95% C.I. 0.87-2.54, p=0.15), which only marginally changed following adjustment for baseline variables, neither of which achieved statistical significance (p=0.16). Withdrawal rates were similar between groups (23, 30.7% Mepilex vs. 23, 28.4% Allevyn). Pain improved following treatment with both dressings (p<0.001), but with no difference between dressings. To compare the effect on the microcirculation in venous leg ulcers (VLUs) of two treatment regimens that promote a moist wound environment versus paraffin gauze. The hypothesis is that moist wound dressings are more likely to stimulate the microcirculation and therefore angiogenesis.
                Patients with non-healing VLUs were randomised to receive either a foam dressing (Suprasorb P), a collagen dressing (Suprasorb C) plus the foam dressing, or paraffin gauze (control). All patients wore short-stretch high compression bandages. Parameters used to measure the effects of the treatments on the microcirculation were: TcPO2 measurements, video laser Doppler measurements and the number of capillaries in the wound bed. The progression towards healing was measured by the reduction in ulcer area and formation of granulation tissue. The treatment period was four weeks.
                Significant increases in TcPO2 values were reported between baseline and week 4 for patients receiving the foam dressing only or the collagen plus foam dressing combination (p<0.008 versus p<0.003 respectively). There was also a significant increase in the number of capillaries for the collagen plus foam treatment only (p<0.002).
                This pilot study suggests that a moist wound environment stimulates perfusion of blood and oxygen to the wound tissue, thereby promoting angiogenesis. The collagen and foam dressing combination demonstrated superior results to the control and the foam dressing only. Monitoring the microcirculation may help to assess the effect of dressings on VLU healing, although more research is needed.
                This pilot study was supported by a limited grant from Lohmann & Rauscher GmbH, Germany. A hydropolymer dressing (Tielle) and a hydrocolloid dressing (Granuflex) were compared in a randomised controlled clinical study involving 100 patients with leg ulcers and 99 patients with pressure sores in the community. Statistically significant differences in favour of the hydropolymer dressing were detected for dressing leakage and odour production, but no statistically significant differences were recorded in the number of patients with either leg ulcers or pressure sores who healed in each treatment group. nan To evaluate the safety and performance of Alione Hydrocapillary dressing (Coloplast A/S) in the management of highly exuding chronic venous leg ulcers and compare it with two hydropolymer dressings,Tielle and Tielle Plus (Johnson & Johnson).
                A comparative clinical trial was conducted on 97 patients with an ankle brachial pressure index > or = 0.8 and a highly exuding leg ulcer. Ulcer duration was at least four weeks. Treatment continued until healing or for a maximum of 12 months.
                There was no statistically significant difference in healing time or wound area reduction between the two treatment protocols. The test dressing (Alione Hydrocapillary) had better absorption capacity and was more comfortable for the patients than the comparator dressings (Tielle/Tielle Plus) and adhered less to the wound bed.Also, more patients preferred the test dressing to their previous treatment. Although severe leakage and maceration were observed more frequently in the comparator group compared with the test group, this was not statistically significant.
                Both treatment protocols were safe and effective in treating highly exuding chronic venous leg ulcers. The test dressing performed as well as or better than the comparator dressings for all study parameters and more patients preferred the test dressing to their previous dressing compared with the comparator dressings. In this article, we describe a randomised trial in which two established primary dressings - Comfeel (Coloplast, UK) and Granuflex improved formulation (Convatec, UK) - were compared to Cutinova foam (Beiersdorf Medical, UK) in the management of venous leg ulcers. Patients that met the study trial criteria were randomised to receive one of the three primary dressings. All ulcers were secondarily bandaged with Comprilan (Beiersdorf Medical, UK) short-stretch compression. The three dressings were compared in terms of their ability to promote ulcer healing (closure rate and healing rate) and reduce the prevalence and severity of ulcer-associated pain, over a 12-week period. The ease with which dressings could be used in a busy outpatient clinic setting was also considered. On enrollment, groups were well matched in terms of all of the patient and ulcer parameters studies. Six patients were withdrawn for reasons unrelated to study dressings or trial procedures. Following non-parametric analysis of the study data, the three dressings were found to be equally effective at promoting ulcer healing and alleviating ulcer-associated pain. Study personnel rated Cutinova Foam as easy, if not easier, to use than Comfeel or Granuflex. This study suggests that Cutinova Foam is as safe and effective as both Comfeel and Granuflex, in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. Venous leg ulcers are the most prevalent form of chronic wounds in the Western world. The principles of moist wound healing coupled with the use of graduated compression bandaging have become the cornerstone of treatment for venous leg ulcers but not all moist dressings are alike. To compare the attributes of a foam composite dressing with those of a hydrocellular foam dressing in the management of venous leg ulcers, a prospective, randomized, comparative 12-week study was conducted in 15 centers in the US, Canada, France, Germany, and the UK. Dressings were changed and compression bandages applied per manufacturer recommendations and dressing performance was assessed at every dressing change and at the final evaluation. Patients with venous ulcers were randomized to treatment for 12 weeks with either hydrocellular foam (n = 52) or foam composite (n = 55) dressing. Healing differences between the groups were not statistically significant, with 36% of patients using foam composite dressing healed in a mean of 66 days and 39% of patients using hydrocellular foam dressing healed in a mean of 73 days. However, the foam composite dressing performed significantly better than the hydrocellular foam dressing with regard to condition of the periwound skin - 55% of patients in the foam composite group having healed or markedly improved surrounding skin compared to 37% of patients using hydrocellular foam (P = 0.03). The foam composite dressing was rated significantly better than the hydrocellular foam dressing ("very good" to "excellent") in level of satisfaction with conformability (87% and 75%, respectively, P = 0.05); being non-sensitizing (73% and 52%, respectively, P = 0.02); and ease of application (93% and 81%, respectively, P = 0.01). The findings reported in this study suggest that the foam composite dressing offers significant improvements in the quality of life of patients with venous leg ulcers as well as for their caregivers.
The current evidence base does not suggest that foam dressings are more effective in the healing of venous leg ulcers than other wound dressing treatments. The evidence in this area is of low quality. Further evidence is required from well-designed and rigorously-conducted RCTs, that employ methods to minimise bias and report them clearly, before any definitive conclusions can be made regarding the efficacy of foam dressings in the management of venous leg ulcers.