Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ achieved superior complete wound closure vs DACC dressings in an RCT.1
Managing wounds appropriately with Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ gives your patients the chance to heal wounds¹
Hard-to-heal wounds, such as venous leg ulcers (VLUs), are a major challenge to healthcare systems globally5
- Estimated prevalence of ~1.9 per 1000 population6,7
- Associated with reduced patient health-related quality of life and substantial economic burden8,9
Biofilm has long been implicated in hard-to-heal wounds10
- At least 78% of hard-to-heal wounds are estimated to have biofilm11
- Biofilm can protect microorganisms from antibiotics, antiseptics and host immunity10
Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ is a gelling fibre dressing with antibiofilm properties4
- Indicated for moderate to highly exuding hard-to-heal and acute wounds with infection or an increased risk of infection12
- Contains BEC and EDTA which work synergistically with iconic silver to disrupt and destroy biofilm4
A Multinational Randomised Controlled Trial¹
Introduction
Methods and baseline characteristics
PRIMARY
- Complete wound closure of week 12 (100% surface epithelialization)
SECONDARY
- Percent change in wound area (week 4 & 12)
- Satisfactory clinical progress (40% wound area reduction at week 4)
EXPLORATORY
- Time to complete wound closure
SAFETY
- Adverse events (AEs)
- Device-related AEs
- The mean wound area was 10.2cm2 in Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ arm compared with 17.32 in the DACC arm.
- In Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ arm, six patients had wound infection at baseline (no patients in the DACC arm had infection).
- Exudate volume on both arms were recorded evenly.
- Majority of tissue type in both arms is slough/fibrin and healthy granulation.
Results
- Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ was associated with statistically significantly increased rate of complete wound closure at week 12 compared to DACC dressings, as well we a faster time to complete wound closure
- VLUs treated with Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ had a 35% increased likelihood of complete wound closure compared to DACC dressings at 12 weeks
- Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ a resulted in a significantly greater percentage reduction in wound area compared to DACC dressings.
- Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ was a safe treatment option with no serious of concern dressing-related AEs
- Improved quality of life (QoL) with significantly higher rate of satisfactory clinical progress13
- Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ a had a 19% increased likelihood of satisfactory clinical progress compared to DACC dressings
Summary
Management of VLUs with Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ versus DACC dressings was associated with
- Significantly better complete wound closure rate (74.8%) at week 12
- Significantly shorter wound closure time in 56 days
- Significantly greater percentage (85.2%) reduction in wound area
- Significantly higher rate (77.1%) of satisfactory clinical progress
- Lower incidence of AEs
- Improved QoL13
Powered by Hydrofiber™ and More Than Silver™ technologies⁴
Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ outperforms other silver-dressings to disrupt and destroy biofilm bacteria.² ³ ⁴ ¹²
BEC*, a surfactant, reduces the surface tension to enhance the anti-biofilm performance of Aquacel® Ag+ Extra™ dressing. 14,15,16
EDTA, A metal chelating agent, EDTA helps disrupt biofilm by removing metal ions that hold the EPS matrix together to expose microorganisms to the antimicrobial effects of the ionic silver. 15,17,18,19
IONIC SILVER, A broad-spectrum antimicrobial contained in a safe and effective quantity (1.2%) ensures cell death of the exposed bacteria by damaging the DNA, denaturing proteins and enzymes, and interfering with protein synthesis. 4,20,21
Developing MORE THAN SILVERTM technology involved researching a wide range of biofilm-disrupting agents and surfactants in combination with ionic silver. 4
Not all claims are supported in all regulatory geographies.
1.Beraldo S. et al. Effectiveness of an enhanced silver-containing dressing in hard-to-heal venous leg ulcers: a randomised controlled trial. Journal of Wound Care, 2025.
2.Meredith K, et al. Assessment of the Antibiofilm Performance of Silver-Containing Wound Dressings: A Dual-Species Biofilm Model. Cureus. 2024; 16(9):e70086.
3.Meredith et al. Assessment of Silver-Containing Gelling Fiber Dressings Against Antibiotic-Resistant Pathogens Using an in vitro Biofilm Model. Infect Drug Resist. 2023 Nov 2;16:7015-7019.
4.Bowler PG & Parsons D. Combatting wound biofilm and recalcitrance with a novel anti-biofilm Hydrofiber® wound dressing. Wound Medicine 14 (2016) 6–11.
5.Rice JB et al. Burden of diabetic foot ulcers for medicare and private insurers. Diabetes Care 2014; 37(3):651–658.
6.Martinengo L et al. Prevalence of chronic wounds in the general population: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann Epidemiol 2019; 29:8–15.
7.Sen CK. Human Wound and Its Burden: Updated 2020 Compendium of Estimates. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle) 2021; 10(5):281–292.
8.Olsson M et al. The humanistic and economic burden of chronic wounds: A systematic review. Wound Repair Regen 2019; 27(1):114–125.
9.Chan B et al. Cost-of-illness studies in chronic ulcers: a systematic review. J Wound Care 2017; 26(Suppl 4):S4–S14.
10.James GA et al. Biofilms in chronic wounds. Wound Repair Regen 2008; 16(1):37–44.
11.Malone M et al. The prevalence of biofilms in chronic wounds: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published data. J Wound Care 2017; 26(1):20–25.
12.1708881v1 Instruction for Use, Convatec.
13.WC-22-435 clinical study report, Convatec 2024.
14.Parsons. Composition comprising antimicrobial metal ions and a quaternary cationic surfactant. WO2012136968A1.
15.Murphy et al. International consensus document. Embedding Wound Hygiene into a proactive wound healing strategy. J Wound Care 2022; 31:S1–S24.
16.Hall-Stoodley L I et al. Towards diagnostic guidelines for biofilm-associated infections. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol. 2012; 65:127–145.
17.Wolcott RD et al. Biofilm maturity studies indicate sharp debridement opens a time dependent therapeutic window. J Wound Care. 2010 Aug; 19(8):320-8.
18.Banin et al. Chelator-Induced Dispersal and Killing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Cells in Biofilm. Appl. Environ. Microbiol 2006; 72: 2064-2069.
19.Finnegan & Percival. EDTA: an antimicrobial and antibiofilm agent for use in wound care. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle) 2015; 4: 415–421.
20.Lansdown. Silver 1: Its antibacterial properties and mechanisms of action. J Wound Care 2002; 11: 125-130.
21.Lansdown. The role of silver. Eur Tissue Rep Soc 2002; 9: 108-111.
*BEC, benzethonium chloride
AP-73302-GBL-ENG-v1
®/™ all the trademarks are the property of Convatec group companies. ©2025 Convatec Inc.