BiologicsExtremities

Smith+Nephew’s IODOSORB™ Range shown more than twice as likely to heal wounds than standard care

LONDON, Oct. 26, 2021 /PRNewswire/ — Smith+Nephew (NYSE:SNN; LSE:SN), the global medical technology business, is pleased to announce the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative trials to determine the efficacy of its IODOSORB 0.9% Cadexomer Iodine Range* on chronic wounds versus standard care specific to the wound type.1

The review found that wounds were more than twice as likely to completely heal with IODOSORB Range than with standard care, and significantly greater reductions in wound area** were observed after 8 weeks of treatment versus standard care.

Use of IODOSORB Range helped reduce barriers to healing such as exudate, slough, pus, debris and bacteria, significantly reducing wound area** and increasing the chance of healing chronic wounds compared with standard care.1 Venous leg ulcers (VLUs), diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) and pressure ulcers were included in the study.

“With the cost of chronic hard to heal wounds an estimated $3.9 billion in Canada, they can be a major burden on patient quality of life, healthcare resources and budgets,” said Dr. Kevin Woo, PhD, RN, Associate Professor, Queen’s School of Nursing, University of Toronto, Canada. “The data demonstrate consistent positive outcomes [IODOSORB] has on chronic stalled wounds through the removal of barriers that impede wound healing.”

The review included 13 studies comparing IODOSORB Dressings with standard care, summarising the clinical evidence supporting IODOSORB Dressings in wound bed preparation. In addition to patient comorbidities, there were a number of local factors that could act as barriers to wound healing. These included excessive exudate, cellular debris/pus/slough, and the presence of biofilm or infection.1

IODOSORB Dressing is a unique topical antimicrobial with dual-action, offering the benefits of a broad-spectrum, sustained-activity antimicrobial agent in combination with desloughing and fluid-handling properties, making it effective against biofilm in vitro and in vivo.2-28

To learn more about the IODOSORB Range please click here.

*includes IODOSORB 0.9% Cadexomer Iodine Ointment, IODOSORB 0.9% Cadexomer Iodine Gel, IODOSORB 0.9% Cadexomer Iodine Powder, IODOSORB 0.9% Cadexomer Iodine Dressing
**p=0.0219

References

  1. Woo K, Dowsett C, Costa B, Ebohon S, Woodmansey EJ, Malone M. Efficacy of topical cadexomer iodine treatment in chronic wounds: Systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative clinical trials. Int Wound J. 2021;[Epub ahead of print].
  2. Smith + Nephew 2017. Review of Perstorp Pharma Absorption Capacity Quality Assurance Data for IODOSORB/IODOFLEX Dressings. Internal Report. DS/17/365/R.
  3. Skog E. et al. A randomized trial comparing cadexomer iodine and standard treatment in the out-patient management of chronic venous ulcers. Br. J. Dermatol. 1983;109:77–83
  4. Moberg S, Hoffman L, Grennert ML, Holst A. A randomized trial of cadexomer iodine in decubitus ulcers. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1983;31(8):462-465.
  5. Harcup JW, Saul PA. A study of the effect of cadexomer iodine in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. Br J Clin Pract. 1986;40(9):360-364.
  6. Hillström L. Iodosorb compared to standard treatment in chronic venous leg ulcers–a multicenter study. Acta Chir Scand Suppl. 1988;544:53-56.
  7. Akiyama H, Oono T, Saito M, Iwatsuki K. Assessment of cadexomer iodine against Staphylococcus aureus biofilm in vivo and in vitro using confocal laser scanning microscopy. J Dermatol. 2004;31(7):529-534.
  8. Zhou LH, Nahm WK, Badiavas E, Yufit T, Falanga V. Slow release iodine preparation and wound healing: in vitro effects consistent with lack of in vivo toxicity in human chronic wounds. Br J Dermatol. 2002;146(3):365-374.
  9. Smith + Nephew 2017. Review of Perstorp Pharma Absorption Capacity Quality Assurance Data for IODOSORB Powder. Internal Report. DS/17/363/R.
  10. Smith + Nephew 2017. Review of Perstorp Pharma Absorption Capacity Quality Assurance Data for IODOSORB Ointment/Gel. DS/17/364/R.
  11. Perstorp Pharmaceuticals. Iodine release from CADEX, iodocoat and U pasta. Smith & Nephew Data on file #091101. (2009).
  12. Troëng T, Skog E, Arnesjö B, Gjöres JE, Bergljung L, Gundersen J, E. A. A randomised multicentre trial to compare the efficacy of cadexomer iodine and standard treatment in the management of chronic venous ulcers in out patients. in Cadexomer Iodine, (eds. Fox, J. & Fisher, H.) 43–50 (Schattauer Verlag, 1983).
  13. Holloway GA Jr, Johansen KH, Barnes RW, Pierce GE. Multicenter trial of cadexomer iodine to treat venous stasis ulcer. West J Med. 1989;151(1):35-38.
  14. Hansson C. The effects of cadexomer iodine paste in the treatment of venous leg ulcers compared with hydrocolloid dressing and paraffin gauze dressing. Cadexomer Iodine Study Group. Int J Dermatol. 1998;37(5):390-396.
  15. Ormiston MC, Seymour MT, Venn GE, Cohen RI, Fox JA. Controlled trial of Iodosorb in chronic venous ulcers. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1985;291(6491):308-310. doi:10.1136/bmj.291.6491.308
  16. Smith & Nephew 2008. IODOFLEX dressings against a variety of micro-organisms grown in single and mixed species biofilms. Internal Report. 0804006.
  17. Smith & Nephew 2008. IODOFLEX dressings – disruption of a variety of micro-organisms grown in pre-established single and mixed species biofilms. Internal Report. 0804007.
  18. Oates JL, Phillips CD, Wolcott R, Woodmansey E. Effect of a Cadexomer Iodine Wound Dressing on a Chronic Wound Multi-Species Biofilm Model with Comparison to a Silver Hydrofiber Antibiofilm Dressing. in SAWC Atlanta 1 (2016).
  19. Schierle CF, De la Garza M, Mustoe TA, Galiano RD. Staphylococcal biofilms impair wound healing by delaying reepithelialization in a murine cutaneous wound model. Wound Repair Regen. 2009;17(3):354-359.
  20. Wolcott RD, Rhoads DD, Bennett ME, et al. Chronic wounds and the medical biofilm paradigm. J Wound Care. 2010;19(2):45-53.
  21. Lindsay G, Latta D, Lyons KGB. A study in general practice of the efficacy of cadexomer iodine in venous leg ulcers treated on alternate days. Acta Ther. 12, 141–148 (1986).
  22. Schwartz JA, Lantis JC 2nd, Gendics C, Fuller AM, Payne W, Ochs D. A prospective, non comparative, multicenter study to investigate the effect of cadexomer iodine on bioburden load and other wound characteristics in diabetic foot ulcers. Int Wound J. 2013;10(2):193-199.
  23. Smith + Nephew 2018. Antimicrobial activity of IODOSORB range against a broad spectrum of wound pathogens. Internal Report. 1801001
  24. Smith + Nephew 2007. An evaluation of the use of IODOSORB ointment and dressing in the management of chronic exuding wounds. Internal Report. SR/CE/027/IOD.
  25. Smith & Nephew 2018. Antimicrobial activity of IODOSORB range in a 3 day repeat challenge model. Internal Report. 1801002.
  26. Smith + Nephew 2018.Release of Iodine from IODOSORB Powder into 0.9% saline solution over a three day period. Internal Report. DS/18/024/R.
  27. Smith + Nephew 2018.Release of IODOSORB Ointment / Gel into 0.9% saline solution over a three day period. Internal Report. DS/18/025/R.
  28. Smith + Nephew 2018.Release of Iodine from IODOSORB / IODOFLEX Dressing into 0.9% saline solution over a three day period. Internal Report. DS/18/026/R.

About Smith+Nephew
Smith+Nephew is a portfolio medical technology business that exists to restore people’s bodies and their self-belief by using technology to take the limits off living. We call this purpose ‘Life Unlimited’. Our 18,000 employees deliver this mission every day, making a difference to patients’ lives through the excellence of our product portfolio, and the invention and application of new technologies across our three global franchises of Orthopaedics, Advanced Wound Management and Sports Medicine & ENT.

Founded in Hull, UK, in 1856, we now operate in more than 100 countries, and generated annual sales of $4.6 billion in 2020. Smith+Nephew is a constituent of the FTSE100 (LSE:SN,NYSE:SNN). The terms ‘Group’ and ‘Smith+Nephew’ are used to refer to Smith & Nephew plc and its consolidated subsidiaries, unless the context requires otherwise.

For more information about Smith+Nephew, please visit www.smith-nephew.com and follow us on TwitterLinkedInInstagram or Facebook.

To learn more about how we can help you get CLOSER TO ZERO human and economic consequence of wounds, please visit www.closertozero.com

Forward-looking Statements
This document may contain forward-looking statements that may or may not prove accurate. For example, statements regarding expected revenue growth and trading margins, market trends and our product pipeline are forward-looking statements. Phrases such as “aim”, “plan”, “intend”, “anticipate”, “well-placed”, “believe”, “estimate”, “expect”, “target”, “consider” and similar expressions are generally intended to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from what is expressed or implied by the statements. For Smith+Nephew, these factors include: risks related to the impact of COVID-19, such as the depth and longevity of its impact, government actions and other restrictive measures taken in response, material delays and cancellations of elective procedures, reduced procedure capacity at medical facilities, restricted access for sales representatives to medical facilities, or our ability to execute business continuity plans as a result of COVID-19; economic and financial conditions in the markets we serve, especially those affecting health care providers, payers and customers (including, without limitation, as a result of COVID-19); price levels for established and innovative medical devices; developments in medical technology; regulatory approvals, reimbursement decisions or other government actions; product defects or recalls or other problems with quality management systems or failure to comply with related regulations; litigation relating to patent or other claims; legal compliance risks and related investigative, remedial or enforcement actions; disruption to our supply chain or operations or those of our suppliers (including, without limitation, as a result of COVID-19); competition for qualified personnel; strategic actions, including acquisitions and dispositions, our success in performing due diligence, valuing and integrating acquired businesses; disruption that may result from transactions or other changes we make in our business plans or organisation to adapt to market developments; and numerous other matters that affect us or our markets, including those of a political, economic, business, competitive or reputational nature. Please refer to the documents that Smith+Nephew has filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission under the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including Smith+Nephew’s most recent annual report on Form 20-F, for a discussion of certain of these factors. Any forward-looking statement is based on information available to Smith+Nephew as of the date of the statement. All written or oral forward-looking statements attributable to Smith+Nephew are qualified by this caution. Smith+Nephew does not undertake any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement to reflect any change in circumstances or in Smith+Nephew’s expectations.

™ Trademark of Smith+Nephew. Certain marks registered US Patent and Trademark Office.

SOURCE Smith & Nephew plc

Related Links

http://www.smith-nephew.com

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Chris J. Stewart

Chris currently serves as President and CEO of Surgio Health. Chris has close to 20 years of healthcare management experience, with an infinity to improve healthcare delivery through the development and implementation of innovative solutions that result in improved efficiencies, reduction of unnecessary financial & clinical variation, and help achieve better patient outcomes. Previously, Chris was assistant vice president and business unit leader for HPG/HCA. He has presented at numerous healthcare forums on topics that include disruptive innovation, physician engagement, shifting reimbursement models, cost per clinical episode and the future of supply chain delivery.

Related Articles

Back to top button