Explore the evidence.
Understand its limits.

One product-specific multicenter RCT (n=119) met its primary endpoint at 12 weeks, and a 2026 meta-analysis of six RCTs of autologous blood-derived products (n=629) found the ActiGraft clot the best-performing modality. More than twenty further studies cover diabetic foot, venous, pressure, surgical, pilonidal and fistula wounds.

Five randomized trials and two meta-analyses of the MIST/UltraMIST platform report faster healing and larger wound-area reduction than standard care, with a dozen further comparative and case studies. The current UltraMIST system (510(k) K140782) is the same non-contact low-frequency ultrasound platform as the original Celleration MIST device (K050129).

Graded on its product class: a 2022 meta-analysis of eleven RCTs (n=961) found collagen dressings plus standard care healed significantly more wounds than standard care alone. No study tests the Ovena-branded pad itself.

Graded on the collagen-dressing class (a meta-analysis of eleven RCTs). A 54-patient surgical case series of hydrolyzed bovine collagen powder reported no dehiscence or infection, though that series is not indexed in PubMed.

The kit's active component is the same Type I collagen pad, so it carries the class grade; the gloves, saline, island dressings and tape are exempt commodity items.

Graded on the graduated-compression class: Cochrane reviews of 48 and 14 RCTs show faster venous ulcer healing with compression, and a review of 12 RCTs shows fewer travel-related clots with graduated stockings. No study tests the Ovena sock itself.

A completed randomized trial (n=37) after Mohs surgery is registered with results posted, though not yet published in a journal. A retrospective comparison (n=47) found the wounds that closed healed twice as fast as with standard care, supported by two small prospective series and bench antimicrobial data.

A peer-reviewed interim analysis of two registered randomized trials (n=53) reported complete closure in 50% of treated wounds versus 17% with standard care. Final full-cohort results are not yet published.

Five case series of 2 to 15 patients in trauma, failed-flap, ballistic, abdominal and hernia wounds report early granulation and closure. The 510(k) clearance rests on bench and biocompatibility data, and no controlled study exists.

One prospective single-arm human pilot (32 evaluable wounds) reported that 91% either healed completely or improved significantly at 12 weeks, supported by animal safety data and veterinary series. A randomized split-wound human trial is registered but has posted no results.

One retrospective matched-cohort study (n=182) reported 63.7% healing versus 48.4% with standard care. A randomized trial was terminated without results and three more trials are registered.

One 2026 case series (83 wounds) reported 55% closure; four trials are registered and none is published yet.

Three bench studies at Qoustic's 35 kHz operating frequency show multi-log reductions of common wound bacteria and MRSA and changes in fibroblast behaviour, but no clinical outcome study of the device has been published.

No clinical study of Interfyl itself, in any design, has been published. The only product-specific papers are a tendon-cell bench study and a composition review; the healing-rate figures often quoted for this class come from other placental products.

This dual-layer amnion-chorion allograft has no published clinical study of its own. Two sponsor-run platform trials that include it as one of several arms are still recruiting.

This single-layer amnion allograft has no published clinical study of its own, and the same two recruiting platform trials as Palisade include it. Its brochure cites general amniotic-tissue science only.

Cleared in 2024 with no published clinical study.

No published product-specific study; four trials are registered.

No published study; three trials are registered and recruiting.

Construct-identical to the outpatient products per the shared IFU; no independent evidence names a Restore product.

No published clinical study of any kind; one randomized trial is registered and recruiting.

No clinical study, case series or bench study names MicroDoc or Pensar Medical; the device is cleared under 510(k) K200223 as PocketDoc. Single-use negative-pressure devices as a class are well studied, with meta-analyses showing fewer surgical-site infections, and that class evidence is listed for context.

No published study or registered trial names AmCoreMatrix. The one clinical paper on file for dehydrated amnion-chorion as a laparoscopic adhesion barrier is not indexed in PubMed and is not cited here, and animal studies of amnion barriers are mixed.

No exosome product is FDA-approved, and these are sold for research and cosmetic use only, as their own price lists state. No clinical study or registered trial exists for them.

Sold for minor skin protection such as blemishes, blisters and calluses rather than as a wound-healing device, so it is not clinically graded. Hydrocolloid dressings as a class have a Cochrane review in chronic wounds, listed for context.

A donning aid with no therapeutic claim, so it is not clinically graded; the maker cites only a 5,000-cycle durability test.

Sterile 0.9% saline is the reference cleansing solution in wound-care trials rather than a treatment with an outcome claim, so it is not graded. A 2022 Cochrane review of 13 RCTs (n=2,504) found only low-certainty differences between cleansing solutions.

Commodity consumables such as gauze, tape and gloves; not clinically graded.