about AQUACEL dressings More to love about AQUACEL® dressings

about AQUACEL dressings More to love about AQUACEL® dressings

d by
d by
™
™
•
•
STRENGTH
STRENGTH • ABSORBENCY
ABSORBENCY • CONFIDENCE
CONFIDENCE
More
More to
to love
love
about
about AQUACEL
AQUACEL dressings
dressings
®
®
AQUACEL Dressings
TRIED.TRUE.TRUSTED.™
®
Clinicians face many wound management
challenges every day
• Retaining and controlling exudate levels to prevent maceration1
• Removing harmful bacteria and enzymes from the wound to reduce delayed healing1
• Minimizing patient pain and discomfort during dressing changes or when dressing
is in situ1
• Containing costs while providing effective care
Hydrofiber ® Technology, found in the AQUACEL® family
of dressings, is uniquely designed to:
Lock in wound exudate and bacteria and
reduce lateral spread of fluid2-4
• Helps protect periwound skin from maceration5
• May help minimize cross-infection and risk of wound
infection during removal2,6
Micro-contour to the wound bed7
• Minimizes “dead space” where bacteria can grow7
• Maintains an optimal moisture balance in the wound bed8
Respond to wound fluid levels by forming a
cohesive gel
• Unique gelling action protects tender wound tissue and
minimizes pain associated with dressing changes4,9,10
AQUACEL® dressinga is supported by a 15-year clinical
heritage that demonstrates efficacy
• 17 randomized controlled trials
—50+ review papers as well as scientific and animal studies
• Demonstrated evidence of progressing wounds toward healing10-16
• Shown to be a cost-reducing adjunct to a protocol of care17-19
The following applies to AQUACEL® and AQUACEL® Ag dressings.
All images are artists’ impressions.
a
ered by
AQUACEL® EXTRA™ dressing takes Hydrofiber ®
Technology to the next level
Stitch bonded
for extra strengthb
More Hydrofiber ® Technology
for extra absorbency b
AOUACEL
AQUACEL® EXTRA™ dressing is designed to provide
additional benefits20b
EXTRA Strength
9x stronger dressing
b
EXTRA Absorbency
39% greater absorbencyb
• Helps facilitate easy removal
• May increase patient comfort during dressing changes
• More confidently manages exuding wounds
• May enhance dressing efficiencies
As compared to original AQUACEL® dressing.
b
NewAOUACEL
™
Hydrofiber® dressing with strengthening fiber
AQUACEL Dressings
TRIED. TRUE. TRUSTED.
®
TM
®
®
™ dressing
™manages
™ ®dressing
AQUACEL
EXTRA
AQUACEL
EXTRA
manages
dressing
a wide
range
a wide ran
AQUACEL
EXTRA
amanages
wide
range
of exudate
levels
of
exudate
in chronic
levels
and in
acute
chronic
wounds
and
acute
wounds
®
of
exudate
levels
in
and
acute
wounds
™chronic
AQUACEL
EXTRA
dressing
manages
a wide
range
Low exudateModerate
exudateexudate Moderate exudate
High exudate
Moderate
High exudate
of exudate levels
in chronic
and acute wounds
Low exudate
Low exudate
Low exudate
Moderate exudate
®
™
High e
High exudate
AQUACEL EXTRA dressing
AOUACEL
AOUACEL
AOUACEL
AOUACEL
®
®
™ dressing—the
™ ®dressing—the
AQUACEL
AQUACEL
EXTRA
EXTRA™ dressing—the
newest
member
newest
of ofmembe
AQUACEL
EXTRA
newest
member
a trusted
family
family
®a trusted
a trusted
family
AQUACEL
EXTRA™ dressing—the newest member of
Code
Product Description
Dressing Size
Dressings per box
aProduct
trusted
family
420671AQUACEL® EXTRA™
5cm x 5cm
10
420672AQUACEL® EXTRA™
10cm x 10cm
10
420673AQUACEL® EXTRA™
15cm x 15cm
5
New
NewAOUACEL
ewAOUACEL
NAOUACEL
NewAOUACEL
™
™
™
®
HydrofiberHydrofiber
dressing ®with
strengthening
fiber ® dressing
dressing
withHydrofiber
strengthening
fiber with strengthening fiber
™
Hydrofiber® dressing with strengthening fiber
Hydrofiber® Dressing
®
With Strengthening Fibre Hydrofiber Dressing
With Strengthening Fibre
Hydrofiber® Dressing
With Strengthening Fibre
®
Hydrofiber
Dressing
References: 1. World
Union of
Healing
Societies
References:
(WUWHS).
1.Principles
World
Union
of best
of Principles
Wound
practice:
Healing
exudate(WUWHS).
and theexudate
role
Principles
of dressings.
of best
A practice:
consensus
wound
document.
exudate
London:
and
the
MEP
roleLtd.
ofLondon:
dressings.
2007. MEP
2. Walker
ALtd.
consensus
M,
References:
1.Wound
World Union
of Wound
Healing
Societies
(WUWHS).
ofwound
bestSocieties
practice:
wound
and the
role
of dressings.
A consensus
document.
2007.
2.document.
Walker M, London: MEP Ltd. 2
With
Strengthening
Fibreof bacterial
Hobot JA, Newman
GR,
PF. Scanning
electron
Hobot
microscopic
JA,
Newman
examination
GR, Bowler
PF. Scanning
immobilisation
electroninmicroscopic
a carboxymethylcellulose
examination
of(Aquacel)
bacterial immobilisation
and alginate
dressing.
inand
a carboxymethylcellulose
Biomaterials.
2003;24(5):883(Aquacel)2003;24(5):883and alginate dressing. Biomaterials
Hobot
JA,Bowler
Newman
GR, Bowler
PF. Scanning
electron
microscopic
examination
of bacterial
immobilisation
in a carboxymethylcellulose
(Aquacel)
alginate
dressing.
Biomaterials.
90. 3. Newman890.
GR,3.
Walker
M, Hobot
JA, Bowler
PG.890.
Visualisation
Newman
of bacterial
GR, Walker
sequestration
M,
JA,
and
Bowler
bactericidal
PG. Visualisation
activity
within
of bacterial
hydrating
Hydrofiber
wound
andHydrofiber
bactericidal
dressings.
Biomaterials.
activity
within 2006;(7)27:1129-1139.
hydrating
Hydrofiber
wound dressings. Biomaterials. 2006
Newman
GR, Walker
M, Hobot
JA, 3.
Bowler
PG.
Visualisation
of Hobot
bacterial
sequestration
and
bactericidal
activitysequestration
within
hydrating
wound
dressings.
Biomaterials.
2006;(7)27:1129-1139.
. Waring MJ, Parsons
D. MJ,
Physico-chemical
characterization
4. Waring
of MJ,
carboxymethylated
Parsons D.
Physico-chemical
spun cellulosecharacterization
fibres.
Biomaterials.
of carboxymethylated
2000;22(9):903-912.
spun
5. Robinson
cellulose fibres.
BJ.5.
The
Biomaterials.
use of aBJ.
hydrofiber
2000;22(9):903-912.
in wound
5. Robinson
BJ.wound
The use of a hydrofiber d
4. Waring
Parsons D. Physico-chemical
characterization
of carboxymethylated
spun cellulose
fibres.
Biomaterials. 2000;22(9):903-912.
Robinson
The usedressing
of a hydrofiber
dressing in
management. J management.
Wound Care. 2000;9(1):32-34.
6. Bowler
management.
PG, Jones
JSA,
Wound
Davies
BJ, 2000;9(1):32-34.
Coyle
E. Infection
6.control
Bowler
properties
PG, Jones
ofSA,
some
Davies
wound
BJ,of
dressings.
Coyle
Infection
J Wound
control
Care. properties
1999;8(10):499-502.
of some
wound
7. Hoekstra
dressings.
MJ, 7.J Hoekstra
Wound Care.
J Wound Care. 2000;9(1):32-34.
6. Bowler
PG, Care.
Jones
SA, Davies
BJ, Coyle
E. Infection
control
properties
someE.wound
dressings.
J Wound Care.
1999;8(10):499-502.
MJ, 1999;8(10):499-502
Hermans MH, Richters
CD,
Dutrieux
RP.
A
histological
Hermans
comparison
MH,
of
Richters
acute
inflammatory
CD,
Dutrieux
responses
RP.
A
histological
with
a
Hydrofiber
comparison
or
tulle
of
acute
gauze
inflammatory
dressing.
J
responses
Wound
Care.
with
2002;11(3):113-117.
a
Hydrofiber
or
tulle
8.
gauze
Bishop
dressing.
SM,
Walker
J
Wound
M,
Care.
2002;11(3):113-117.
8. Bish
References:
World Union
of Wound
Societies
(WUWHS).
of best practice:
wound
and or
thetulle
rolegauze
of dressings.
A Jconsensus
document.
London: MEP8.Ltd.
2007.
2. Walker M,
Hermans
MH,1.Richters
CD, Dutrieux
RP.Healing
A histological
comparison
of Principles
acute inflammatory
responses
with exudate
a Hydrofiber
dressing.
Wound Care.
2002;11(3):113-117.
Bishop
SM,
Rogers AA, Chen
WY. Importance
ofGR,
moisture
balance
Rogers
at the wound-dressing
AA,
Chenat
WY.
interface.
JofWound
moisture
Care.
balance
2003;12(4):125-128.
at
theCare.
wound-dressing
interface.
L, Moldavsky
Wound
M,L,Care.
Szvalb
2003;12(4):125-128.
S, Govrin-Yehudain
9.
J. Kogan
Comparative
L, Moldavsky
study
M, Szvalb
S, Govrin-Yehudain J. C
Hobot
JA,
Bowler
PF.ofScanning
electron
microscopic
examination
of
bacterial
immobilisation
in9.aKogan
carboxymethylcellulose
(Aquacel)
and
alginateS,dressing.
Biomaterials.
2003;24(5):883Rogers
AA,Newman
Chen WY.
Importance
moisture
balance
theImportance
wound-dressing
interface.
J Wound
2003;12(4):125-128.
9.J Kogan
Moldavsky
M, Szvalb
Govrin-Yehudain
J. Comparative
study
f Aquacel and of
Silverol
treatment
in
burns.
Ann
Burns
of
Fire
Aquacel
Disasters.
and
2004;17(4):201-207.
Silverol
treatment
in
burns.
10.
Barnea
Ann
Burns
Y,
Amir
Fire
A,
Disasters.
Leshem
D,
2004;17(4):201-207.
et
al.
Clinical
comparative
10.
Barnea
study
Y,
of
Amir
Aquacel
A,
Leshem
and
paraffin
D,
et
al.
gauze
Clinical
dressing
comparative
for
study
of
Aquacel
and
paraffin
g
890.
3. Newman
GR, Walker
M, Hobot
JA, Bowler
PG. Visualisation
of 2004;17(4):201-207.
bacterial sequestration
bactericidal
activity
within
Hydrofiber
wound
dressings.
Biomaterials.
2006;(7)27:1129-1139.
Aquacel
and Silverol
treatment
in burns.
Ann Burns
Fire Disasters.
10.and
Barnea
Y, Amir A,
Leshem
D, hydrating
et al. Clinical
comparative
study
of Aquacel
and paraffin
gauze dressing for
plit-skin donor site
treatment.
Ann
2004;53(2):132-136.
split-skin
donor11.
site
Brunner
treatment.
U, Eberlein
AnnBrunner
Plast
T. Experiences
Surg.
2004;53(2):132-136.
with
hydrofibres
inBrunner
the
moist
U,2000;22(9):903-912.
treatment
Eberlein
ofExperiences
chronic
wounds,
with
hydrofibres
in particular
ofthe
diabetic
foot.VASA.
treatment
of chronic
wounds, in particular of di
4. Waring
MJ, Parsons
D.Surg.
Physico-chemical
characterization
of carboxymethylated
spun
cellulose
fibres. 11.
Biomaterials.
5.
Robinson
BJ.wounds,
The in
use
ofmoist
a hydrofiber
dressing
in wound
split-skin
donor
sitePlast
treatment.
Ann
Plast
Surg.
2004;53(2):132-136.
11.
U, Eberlein
T. Experiences
with
hydrofibres
in the T.
moist
treatment
of chronic
in
particular
of diabetic
foot.VASA.
000;29:(4)253-257.
12.
Armstrong
SH,
Ruckley
CV.
Use
2000;29:(4)253-257.
of
a
fibrous
dressing
12.
in
Armstrong
exuding
leg
SH,
ulcers.
Ruckley
J
Wound
CV.
Use
Care.
of
a
1997;6(7):322-324.
fibrous
dressing
in
exuding
13.
Piaggesi
leg
ulcers.
A,
Baccetti
J
Wound
F,
Rizzo
Care.
L,
1997;6(7):322-324.
Romanelli
M,
Navalesl
13.
R,
Piaggesi
Benzi
L.
A,
Baccetti
F,
Rizzo
L,
Romanelli
M,
Na
management. J Wound
Care. 2000;9(1):32-34.
6. Bowler
Jonesdressing
SA, Davies
BJ, Coyle
Infection
control
properties
of some wound
dressings.
WoundF,Care.
7. Hoekstra
MJ,
2000;29:(4)253-257.
12. Armstrong
SH, Ruckley CV.
Use ofPG,
a fibrous
in exuding
legE.
ulcers.
J Wound
Care.
1997;6(7):322-324.
13. Piaggesi
A, JBaccetti
Rizzo1999;8(10):499-502.
L, Romanelli M, Navalesl
R, Benzi
L.
Sodium carboxyl-methyl-cellulose
dressings
in the
Sodium
management
carboxyl-methyl-cellulose
deep ulcerations
dressings
of diabetic
infoot.
theofmanagement
Diabet
Med.
2001;18(4):320-324.
ofDiabet
deep or
ulcerations
14.
diabetic
ClarkeJ foot.
JV,
Deakin
Diabet
AH,
Med.
Dillon
2001;18(4):320-324.
JM, AH,
Emmerson
S,14.Emmerson
Clarke
JV,M,
Hermans
MH, Richters
CD, Dutrieux
RP.
A histological
comparison
of acute
inflammatory
responses
with
afoot.
Hydrofiber
tulle 2001;18(4):320-324.
gauzeof
dressing.
Wound
Care.
2002;11(3):113-117.
8. Bishop
SM,
Walker
Sodium carboxyl-methyl-cellulose
dressings
in theof
management
of deep
ulcerations
diabetic
Med.
14.
Clarke
JV,
Deakin
Dillon
JM,
S,Deakin AH, Dillon J
Kinninmonth AWG.
A prospective
clinical
audit of a
new
Kinninmonth
dressing
for
A prospective
lower
limb arthroplasty
clinical
audit
wounds.
ofarthroplasty
new
J Wound
dressing
Care.
design
2009;18(1):5-11.
for lower
limb2009;18(1):5-11.
arthroplasty
15.
CohnL,
SM,
wounds.
Lopez
PP,
J M,
Wound
Brown
Care.
M,S,etGovrin-Yehudain
2009;18(1):5-11.
al; University
15.
Cohn SM,ofLopez
Rogers
AA, Chen
WY.
of
moisture
balance
at dressing
the
wound-dressing
interface.
Ja Wound
Care.
2003;12(4):125-128.
9.
Kogan
Moldavsky
Szvalb
J.
Comparative
studyPP, Brown M, et al; U
Kinninmonth
AWG.
A Importance
prospective
clinical
audit
of design
aAWG.
new
design
for lower
limb
wounds.
J Wound
Care.
15. Cohn
SM,
Lopez
PP,
Brown M, of
et Miami
al;
University
Miami
Wound Study Group.
Open
surgical
wounds:
howin
does
Wound
Aquacel
Study
compare
Group.
with
Open
wet-to-dry
surgical
gauze?
wounds:
J how
Wound
does
Care.
Aquacel
2004;13(1):10-12.
compare
16.
wet-to-dry
Ravenscroft
gauze?
MJ,JRavenscroft
Harker
Wound
J,Care.
Buch
2004;13(1):10-12.
KA.
Aofprospective,
16.
randomised,
Ravenscroft
MJ,
Harker for
J, Buch KA. A prospec
of Aquacel
and
Silverol
treatment
burns.
Ann
Burns
Fire
Disasters.
2004;17(4):201-207.
10.
Barnea
Y,
Amir
A, with
Leshem
D, et al.
Clinical
comparative
Aquacel
and
gauze
dressing
Wound
Study
Group.
Open
surgical
wounds:
how
does
Aquacel
compare
with wet-to-dry
gauze?
J Wound
Care.
2004;13(1):10-12.
16.
MJ,study
Harker
J, Buch KA.
Aparaffin
prospective,
randomised,
ontrolled trial comparing
wound
dressings
usedAnn
in
hip
controlled
and
knee
trial
surgery
comparing
Aquacel
and11.
Tegaderm
dressings
used
inCutiplast.
hip T.
and
knee
Ann Rsurgery
Collwith
Surg
Aquacel
Engl.Rand
2006;88(1):18-22.
versus
17. Harding
Cutiplast.
KG,
Ann
Price
RHarding
Coll
P, Robinson
Surg
B,2006;88(1):18-22.
Thomas
S, B, foot.VASA.
17. Harding
split-skin donor
site
treatment.
Plast
Surg.
Brunner
U,
Eberlein
Experiences
hydrofibres
in
theEngl.
moist
treatment
of chronic
wounds,
inEngl.
particular
of diabetic
controlled
trial comparing
wound
dressings
used2004;53(2):132-136.
in hip
and
kneewound
surgery
Aquacelversus
and
Tegaderm
versus
Cutiplast.
Ann
CollTegaderm
Surg
2006;88(1):18-22.
17.
KG,
Price
P, Robinson
Thomas
S, KG, Price P, Robin
Hofman D. CostHofman
and dressing
of hydrofiber
alginate
D.
dressings
Cost
dressing
thedressings
management
evaluation
ofmanagement
community-based
hydrofiber
alginate
patients
dressings
with
in
chronic
the
management
legwith
ulceration.
of community-based
Wounds.
patients
chronic
18. Dillon
leg
ulceration.
Wounds.
2000;29:(4)253-257.
Armstrong
SH,Hofman
Ruckley
CV.
Useand
of
ain
fibrous
dressing
exuding
leg ulcers.
Wound
Care.
1997;6(7):322-324.
13.
Piaggesi
A, 2001;13(12):229-236.
Baccetti
F, Rizzowith
L, Romanelli
M, JM,
Navalesl
Benzi
L. 2001;13(12):229-2
D. Costevaluation
and12.
dressing
evaluation
of hydrofiber
alginate
ininthe
of Jcommunity-based
patients
chronic
leg ulceration.
Wounds.
2001;13(12):229-236.
18. R,
Dillon
JM,
Clarke JV, Emmerson
S,
Kinninmonth
AWG.
The
Jubilee
Clarke
method:
JV,
Emmerson
a
modern
dressing
S,
Kinninmonth
design
AWG.
which
The
reduces
Jubilee
complications
method:
a
modern
and
is
cost
dressing
effective
design
following
which
total
reduces
hip
and
complications
knee
athroplasty.
and
is
cost
Poster
effective
presented
following
total
hip
and knee athroplasty.
SodiumJV,
carboxyl-methyl-cellulose
the management
of deep
ulcerations
diabetic
foot.complications
Diabet Med.and
2001;18(4):320-324.
14. Clarke
JV, and
Deakin
Dillon JM,
Emmerson
S,
Clarke
Emmerson S, Kinninmonthdressings
AWG. The in
Jubilee
method: a modern
dressing
designofwhich
reduces
is cost effective following
total hip
kneeAH,
athroplasty.
Poster
presented
t: American Academy
of Orthopaedic
Surgeons
Annual
at:Surgeons
American
Meeting;
Academy
14-17
of Orthopaedic
2007; San
Surgeons
Diego,
CA.
Annual
19. Moore
Meeting;
PJ,
Foster
February
L. Cost
14-17
benefits
2007;
San
of Cost
two
Diego,
dressings
CA.15.
19.
inCohn
the
Moore
management
PJ,
Foster
of
L.Brown
surgical
Cost benefits
wounds.
of
two dressings
in the management of
Kinninmonth
AWG. A prospective
clinical
audit ofAnnual
aFebruary
new dressing
design
for14-17
lower
limb
arthroplasty
wounds.
J
Wound
Care.
2009;18(1):5-11.
SM,
Lopez
PP,
M,
et
al;
University
of
Miami
at:
American
Academy
of Orthopaedic
Meeting;
February
2007;
San
Diego,
CA.
19.
Moore
PJ,
Foster
L.
benefits
of
two
dressings
in
the
management
of
surgical
wounds.
®
®
®
®
Br J Nurs. 2000;9(17):1128-1132.
20.
Preliminary
assessment
Br
J
Nurs.
of
2000;9(17):1128-1132.
the
physical
properties
20.
of
AQUACEL
Preliminary
assessment
EXTRA
vs
AQUACEL
of
&
DURAFIBER™.
properties
Scientific
Background
EXTRA
vs
Report.
AQUACEL
WHRI3461
&
DURAFIBER™.
TA214.
2011,
Scientific
Background
Report. WHRI3
®the physical
® of AQUACEL
Wound
Study
Group. Open surgical
howassessment
does Aquacel
compare
with
wet-to-dryofgauze?
J Wound
Care.
16. Ravenscroft
MJ, Harker
J, BuchReport.
KA. A prospective,
randomised,
EXTRA
vs 2004;13(1):10-12.
AQUACEL & DURAFIBER™.
Scientific
Background
WHRI3461 TA214.
2011,
Br
J Nurs.
2000;9(17):1128-1132.
20.wounds:
Preliminary
of the
physical
properties
AQUACEL
Data on File, ConvaTec
Data used
on File,
ConvaTec
Inc.surgery Aquacel and Tegaderm versus Cutiplast. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2006;88(1):18-22. 17. Harding KG, Price P, Robinson B, Thomas S,
controlled
trialConvaTec
comparingInc.
wound dressings
in hip
and knee
Data onInc.
File,
Hofman D. Cost and dressing evaluation of hydrofiber alginate dressings in the management of community-based patients with chronic leg ulceration. Wounds. 2001;13(12):229-236. 18. Dillon JM,
Clarke JV, Emmerson
S, Kinninmonth
AWG.
The Jubilee
method:are
aEXTRA,
modern
dressing
design
reduces
and isAQUACEL
cost
effective
following
totalAQUACEL
hip
and
knee
athroplasty.
Poster
presentedof ConvaTec Inc. Trie
AQUACEL and Hydrofiber
are
registered
trademarks
of
AQUACEL
ConvaTec
and
Inc.of
Hydrofiber
AQUACEL
registered
AQUACEL
trademarks
SURGICAL,
ofwhich
ConvaTec
and
AQUACEL
Inc.complications
AQUACEL
Ag
EXTRA,
are
SURGICAL,
of
and
Inc.
Ag
True.
SURGICAL
Trusted.
trademarks
AQUACEL
and
Hydrofiber
are registered
trademarks
ConvaTec
Inc.
AQUACEL
EXTRA,
AQUACEL
SURGICAL,
andSURGICAL
AQUACEL
Ag trademarks
SURGICAL
areConvaTec
trademarks
ofTried.
ConvaTec
Inc. Tried.are
True.
Trusted.
American
Academy
of Orthopaedic
Annual
Meeting;Inc.
February
14-17
2007; San
s a trademark ofat:
Inc.
© 2011
ConvaTec
Inc.
is Surgeons
a trademark
ofInc.
ConvaTec
© 2011
ConvaTec
Inc.Diego, CA. 19. Moore PJ, Foster L. Cost benefits of two dressings in the management of surgical wounds.
isConvaTec
aJtrademark
of ConvaTec
Inc. 20.
© 2011
ConvaTec
Br
Nurs. 2000;9(17):1128-1132.
Preliminary
assessment
of the physical properties of AQUACEL® EXTRA vs AQUACEL® & DURAFIBER™. Scientific Background Report. WHRI3461 TA214. 2011,
Data on File, ConvaTec Inc.
ConvaTec (Australia) Pty Limited. ABN 70 131 232 570. Unipark Monash, Building 2, Ground Floor,
195 Wellington Road, Clayton VIC 3168 Australia. PO Box 63, Mulgrave, VIC 3170. Phone: (03) 9239 2700 Facsimile: (03) 9239 2743.
AQUACEL
and Hydrofiber
are registered
trademarks
of 62663,
ConvaTec
Inc. AQUACEL
EXTRA,
AQUACEL SURGICAL, and AQUACEL Ag SURGICAL are trademarks of ConvaTec Inc. Tried. True. Trusted.
ConvaTec (New
Zealand) Limited.
AK2135265
PO Box
Greenlane
1546 New
Zealand.
is a trademark of ConvaTec Inc. © 2011 ConvaTec Inc.
Phone: 0800 441 763. www.convatec.com
January 2012.
W374
ed by
ed by
powered by
AQUACEL
Dressings
AQUACEL Dressings
AQUACEL
Dressings
TRIED.TRIED.
TRUE.TRUE.
TRIED. TRUE. TRUSTED.
TRUSTED.
TRUSTED.
AQUACEL Dressings
TRIED. TRUE. TRUSTED.
®
®
®
TM
TM
®
TM
TM