Julie M. Robertson received a Bachelor of Science in Molecular and Cellular Biology from Texas A&M University and a PhD in Immunology from the University of Texas Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences in Houston. Following graduation, she became a post-doctoral fellow and a scientific writer for the laboratory of Dr. Judith James at the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation. During her time in Oklahoma, Dr. Robertson gained valuable scientific and medical writing experience in the field of autoimmune disease through manuscript, abstract, poster, and grant writing. After leaving Oklahoma, Dr. Robertson became a medical writer at Acelity where she has helped health care professionals publish wound care manuscripts in peer reviewed journals. Dr. Robertson is an employee of 3M.
Ricardo Martinez has worked in the Medical Device Industry for over 25 years in the areas of Product Development, Regulatory Affairs and Medical Information and Publications for distinguished companies such as Adeza Biomedical, Sunnyvale CA; SA Scientific and Acelity of San Antonio, TX. As the Sr Director of Medical Information and Publications for Acelity, Mr. Martinez leads an innovative team of Medical Information and Publication specialists that support a network of health care professionals (HCPs) from around the world. In his current work in Publications, Mr. Martinez assists HCPs to publish their medical findings and techniques in areas of wound care and regenerative medicine in various journals.
Mr. Martinez holds a Master’s of Science degree from Texas A&I University, Kingsville, TX. Mr. Martinez is an employee of 3M.
Robertson-Martinez_Current-Dialogues-in-Wound-Management_2021_Article-16
The number of complex wounds requiring treatment has been increasing.1 To meet the demand, wound care dressings have evolved to target the wound environment and help remove barriers to healing.2,3 3M™ Promogran™ Matrix Family dressings are advanced wound dressings that help maintain a physiologically moist wound environment and promote the development of granulation tissue and epithelization during wound healing.4-6 In order to provide a more comprehensive assessment of the efficacy of the Promogran Matrix Family, Chowdhry et al utilized a systematic review and meta-analysis of literature to assess Promogran Matrix Family efficacy in the treatment of multiple wound types compared to standard of care dressings.7
The systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE and QUOSA for comparative studies published between 1996 and 2020, written in English, with study populations ≥10.7 The meta-analyses utilized the random-effects model. Differences in wound closure rate, percent wound area reduction, wound area reduction, time to complete healing, days of therapy, number of dressing applications, pain, and concentrations of MMP-2, elastase, plasmin and gelatinase were examined.
SUMMARY OF PUBLISHED RESULTS
A total of 20 comparative studies were included in the meta-analyses.7 The most common wound types assessed included diabetic foot ulcers and venous leg ulcers; however, several studies were not restricted by wound type and reported on multiple wound types within the study population.7
Chowdhry et al reported that wounds treated with Promogran dressings were 3.4 times more likely to close than wounds receiving standard control dressings, and a statistically significant effect in favor of Promogran Matrix Family dressing use was found for percent wound area reduction (p=0.006) and wound area reduction (p=0.017, Table 1).7
Limited reporting or inconclusive data prevented the assessment of time to complete healing, days of therapy, number of dressing applications, pain, and MMP-2, elastase, plasmin, and gelatinase concentrations.7
Adverse events were reported for 7.1% of patients receiving Promogran Matrix Family dressings compared to 17.9% of patients receiving control dressings, although serious adverse events were low for both groups (2.0% Promogran Matrix Family vs 7.9% Control).7
DISCUSSION
Chowdhry et al performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of literature to assess Promogran Matrix Family efficacy in the treatment of multiple wound types compared to standard of care dressings.7 In these analyses, Promogran Matrix Family dressing use was associated with increased wound closure rates, wound area reduction, and a decrease in adverse events compared to standard dressings.7
Limitations exist for this study including limited published large, comparative studies, inconsistencies with literature reporting patient population characteristics, and differences in data reporting between published studies used for the meta-analyses. However, the authors took steps to mitigate the study limitations by following a well-defined systematic literature search protocol, limiting the inclusion of studies with small, non-comparative populations, and using the random effects model to minimize potential population heterogeneity.7
References
References:
1. Martinengo L, Olsson M, Bajpai R, et al. Prevalence of chronic wounds in the general population: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann Epidemiol. 2019;29:8-15.
2. Junker JP, Kamel RA, Caterson EJ, Eriksson E. Clinical Impact Upon Wound Healing and Inflammation in Moist, Wet, and Dry Environments. Adv Wound Care. 2013;2(7):348-356.
3. McCarty SM, Percival SL. Proteases and Delayed Wound Healing. Adv Wound Care. 2013;2(8):438-447.
4. Konstantinow A, Fischer TV, Ring J. Effectiveness of collagen/oxidised regenerated cellulose/silver-containing composite wound dressing for the treatment of medium-depth split-thickness skin graft donor site wounds in multi-morbid patients: a prospective, non-comparative, single-centre study. Int Wound J. 2017;14(5):791-800.
5. Klein RJ. Use of Oxidized Regenerated Cellulose (ORC)/Collagen/Silver-ORC Dressings Alone or Subsequent to Advanced Wound Therapies in Complex Wounds. Wounds. 2020;32(2):37-43.
6. Cullen B, Smith R, Mcculloch E, Silcock D, Morrison L. Mechanism of action of PROMOGRAN, a protease modulating matrix, for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. Wound Repair Regen. 2002;10(1):16-25.
7. Chowdhry SA, Nieves Malloure Y, Camardo M, Robertson JM, Keys J. Use of oxidised regenerated cellulose/collagen dressings versus standard of care over multiple wound types: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Wound J. 2021. Epub ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.13625
Note: this is a summarized version of an article published in the International Wound Journal.
Originally published as:
Chowdhry SA, Nieves Malloure Y, Camardo M, Robertson JM, Keys J. Use of oxidised regenerated cellulose/collagen dressings versus standard of care over multiple wound types: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Wound J. 2021. Epub ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.13625
© 2022 3M. All rights reserved. 3M and the other marks shown are marks and/or registered marks. Unauthorized use prohibited. Used under license in Canada.
