Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Theruptor 3-D Composite Microbicidal Dressing in Comparison with Bactigras and Allevyn Dressings on Wound Healing in Participants with Chronic Infected Wounds: A Randomized, Multi-Centric, Comparative, Parallel-Group, Prospective Study.

Int J Low Extrem WoundsJun 27, 2025 (epub)

Mayank Badkur, Vinoth Sundaresan, Tharun Ganapathy et al.

✦ AI-curated · Sources linked

In 30 seconds

This multicentre, randomised, parallel-group study compared Theruptor 3-D composite microbicidal dressing with Bactigras and Allevyn in people with chronic infected wounds, including diabetic and non-diabetic wounds, at five centres in India. Among 210 participants followed for 8 weeks, mean wound area decreased from Day 0 to Day 56 in all three dressing groups (p < .0001); the abstract reports comparable healing outcomes. Bacterial load, exudate scores, and clinical signs and symptoms improved non-significantly over time. Theruptor was rated more comfortable in diabetic participants and was associated with more reports of no application or removal pain among non-diabetic participants.

Key findings

  • Mean wound area decreased from Day 0 to Day 56 in all diabetic and non-diabetic dressing groups (p < .0001).
  • Bacterial load, exudate scores, and clinical signs and symptoms improved non-significantly over time in all three groups (p > .05).
  • Among diabetic participants, Theruptor was rated more comfortable than Bactigras (p = .004) and Allevyn (p = .02).
  • Among non-diabetic participants, more Theruptor users reported no pain during application and removal than users of the comparator dressings.

Why it matters

Chronic wound care involves balancing healing, infection-related measures, and dressing tolerability. These findings suggest that wound area decreased with each of the three dressings over the study period, while some comfort and pain measures favoured Theruptor. The non-significant changes in bacterial load and clinical signs underscore that wound-area reduction alone does not establish comparative antimicrobial benefit.

What to keep in mind

Follow-up was limited to 8 weeks. The abstract reports significant within-group wound-area reductions but does not provide a direct statistical comparison of healing between dressings.

Source

Published in Int J Low Extrem Wounds. This summary was written by xxcode from the publication's abstract and metadata. It is not peer reviewed and is not a substitute for the original article. For clinical decisions, review the original publication.

ShareTelegramLinkedIn

AI-generated summaries may contain errors or omissions. Verify clinically important information with the original publication.

More in General Surgery

Want this personalized?

Stop searching the literature. Choose what you follow and xxcode will build your personalized medical digest.

  • Your specialties
  • Your filters and thresholds
  • Clinical Research + Case Reports, tuned separately
  • Automatic weekly delivery
  • Audio and text

Prefer listening? Personalized audio digests are available with Pro.

Stay updated for free

Get the 3 most interesting publications in one specialty each week.

Weekly email. Unsubscribe anytime.