Realise the possibilities

Realise the possibilities

Key challenges in wound management Retaining wound exudate within the wound area, preventing its spread onto periwound skin 1 Controlling exudate levels while still maintaining a moist wound healing environment 1 Removing harmful bacteria and enzymes from the wound bed, which may prevent the wound from healing 2-4 * *As demonstrated in vitro Minimising patients pain and discomfort when dressings are in place and on dressing change 5-7 It s time to expect more from your dressings. Versiva XC is the advanced wound management dressing that can overcome these challenges because it contains Hydrofiber Technology.

Overcoming the challenges Expect more healthy periwound skin Challenge Maceration of periwound skin is a common complication. 1 Some dressings absorb exudate within their air pocket structure which is released when pressure is applied, potentially causing maceration. 9 Retention of fluid and lateral spread 8 Allevyn NA Allevyn NA cross section Allevyn dressing* Mepilex Mepilex cross section Mepilex dressing* Solution Because Versiva XC dressing contains Hydrofiber Technology, the unique gelling action locks in fluid, 10 preventing it spreading laterally, retaining it, even under pressure. 8 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). 8 Versiva XC 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). 8 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.

Expect more exudate control Challenge Dressings that exhibit a high moisture vapour transmission rate (MVTR) may not always provide the optimal moist wound healing environment due to high levels of moisture lost through the surface of the dressing. 11 Solution The fluid retention properties of the Hydrofiber Technology component of Versiva XC dressing, combined with its lower MVTR, ensure that 12, 13 the wound healing environment remains moist. Versiva XC dressing maintains moisture within the dressing for a longer period than other dressings tested. 14 * *In vitro data testing Allevyn, Mepilex and Versiva XC dressing. Expect more contouring Challenge 15, 16 Contours Dressings that do not contour to the wound bed may leave dead space. 9 Solution Versiva XC dressing contains Hydrofiber Technology, which conforms closely to the wound surface, helping to minimise dead space where bacteria can thrive 15, 16 as demonstrated by in vitro testing. *Depiction of a simulated exuding wound environment. Allevyn dressing* Dead space Versiva XC dressing* Hydrofiber Technology minimises dead space Expect more healing In a non-comparative study there was a significant reduction in mean wound area from 10.1cm 2 at baseline to 5.1cm 2 at four weeks (p<0.001) and healed in five subjects (11%) 5 * 10.13 cm 2 5.06 cm2 Baseline mean wound size (ulcer area) 1 Final evaluation mean wound size (ulcer area) 1 84% *Using protocols of care that included Versiva XC dressing with sustained graduated compression bandages. of patients reported a reduction of pain compared with previous treatment at study end. 5

The science behind Versiva XC The wound contact layer of Versiva XC dressing is made from Hydrofiber Technology, which is unique to ConvaTec. Dressings with Hydrofiber Technology transform wound care by: Locking in wound exudate 10 * Rapidly turns to a clear gel on contact with fluid Absorbs and retains fluid, preventing lateral wicking 8 Traps harmful bacteria and enzymes contained in exudate 2-4 *As demonstrated in vitro 15, 16 Contouring to the wound bed Minimises dead space where harmful bacteria can thrive The gel covers the wound bed Responding to wound conditions Controlled MVTR 13 Maintains a moist wound healing environment Expect more effective combination dressings Because of Hydrofiber Technology, Versiva XC dressing is the only cover dressing specially designed to work in conjunction with AQUACEL and AQUACEL Ag dressings. If a wound is infected or at risk of infection, AQUACEL Ag dressing is the perfect partner for Versiva XC dressing.

Product range Versiva XC dressing is available in a range of sizes in both Adhesive and Non-Adhesive as well as Adhesive Sacral and Adhesive Heel. Versiva XC dressing can be cut to any shape or size, maintaining all the benefits of Hydrofiber Technology. Dressing size Pack size Product code Adhesive 10cm x 10cm 10 S0065 14cm x 14cm 10 S0064 19cm x 19cm 5 S0063 22cm x 22cm 5 S0062 18.5cm x 20.5cm (Heel) 5 S0060 21cm x 25cm (Sacral) 5 S0061 Non-Adhesive 7.5cm x 7.5cm 10 S0059 11cm x 11cm 10 S0058 15cm x 15cm 5 S0057 20cm x 20cm 5 S0056 Expect more get more, from Versiva XC dressing References 1. World Union of Wound Healing Societies. Principles of best practice: Wound exudate and the role of dressings. A consensus document. London: MEP Ltd; 2007. 2. Walker M, Hobot JA, Newman GR, Bowler PG. Scanning electron microscopic examination of bacterial immobilisation in a carboxymethylcellulose (Aquacel) and alginate dressings. Biomaterials. 2003;24(5):883-890. 3. Walker M, Bowler PG, Cochrane CA. In vitro studies to show sequestration of matrix metalloproteinases by silver-containing wound care products. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2007;53(9):18-25. 4. Newman GR, Walker M, Hobot J, Bowler P. Visualisation of bacterial sequestration and bactericidal activity within hydrating Hydrofiber wound dressings. Biomaterials. 2006;27:1129-1139. 5. Vanscheidt W, Münter KC, Klövekorn 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. 6. Parish, LC, Dryjski M, Cadden S. Prospective clinical study of a new adhesive gelling foam dressing in pressure ulcers. Int Wound J. 2008;5:60-67 7. Robinson BJ. The use of a hydrofiber dressing in wound management. J Wound Care 2000;9:32-34. 8. 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. 9. Best Practice Statement: Optimising the use of Versiva XC gelling foam dressing. Wounds UK, Aberdeen, 2009. 10. Waring MJ, Parsons D. Physico-chemical characterisation of carboxymethylated spun cellulose fibres. Biomaterials. 2001;22:903-912. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. A Comparison Of Moisture Balance At a Simulated Wound Dressing/Wound Bed Interface Between Versiva XC and foam dressings WHRI3248 TA176. 14. Comparison of the performance characteristics of Versiva XC against foam dressings. WHRI2720 AI127. November 22, 2006. Data on file, ConvaTec. 15. 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. 16. 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. / TM indicates trademarks of ConvaTec Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. 2009 ConvaTec Inc. Realise the possibilities