A reference for healthcare professionals

Scientific
portfolio.

Explore the products by material and format, inspect the manufacturer references, and read the research behind them.

Explore the products Read the research
Illustrative photograph: BioLab Sciences white box with orange and blue branding and printed water-droplet artworkInspect the packaging
Membrane Wrap Hydro · BioLab Sciences packagingIllustrative packaging photograph
Albacete MedDev / Wound careMaterials, study notes & source documents
In this portfolio
Full evidence library ↗

01Product reference

The product reference.

Browse the materials, packaging and equipment. Open an image for a closer view and its published source image.

Product photographs are illustrative and based on published product references. Where an exact product photograph is unavailable, the manufacturer reference is shown. Always consult the current package and instructions for use.

02Materials & membranes

Tissue source, structure and processing.

A membrane, a particulate matrix and an autologous clot differ in source, structure and preparation. Those differences are the starting point for a product review.

For a placental membrane, identify the tissues retained, the processing method and the supplied format. Then look for clinical research on that exact product.

Placental membranesSheet formats
AmchoPlast retains amnion, intermediate layer and chorion in a dehydrated sheet. The portfolio also includes hydrated membranes, single-layer amnion and other multilayer constructions. Product-specific handling instructions belong alongside the material description.
AmchoPlastMembrane Wrap HydroActivate Matrix
Connective tissue & ECMSheets & particulates
Extracellular matrix (ECM) products vary in tissue source and physical form. Review the composition and intended use of each product, including whether it is supplied as a sheet, powder, particulate or flowable material.
InterfylXCelliStemMyriad Matrix
Autologous preparationsPoint-of-care systems
ActiGraft is a system for preparing a whole-blood clot from the patient’s own blood. Its preparation requirements and evidence should be reviewed separately from those of donated-tissue allografts.
ActiGraftStudies & records

Material reference: Cellution Biologics · AmchoPlast

03Dressings & matrices

Polymer and collagen-based dressings.

Product descriptions often begin with a material or a proposed mechanism: collagen, silver, a polymer scaffold. A useful review also considers the indicated use, application requirements and the evidence in patients.

Illustrative photograph: Microlyte Matrix navy blue carton with cyan and yellow artwork
Microlyte · Illustrative product photograph

Microlyte

A synthetic, bioresorbable polymer matrix containing silver. The manufacturer describes its antimicrobial performance and material characteristics; the human pilot study answers a different question about wound progress over time.

Read the study note

Manufacturer reference ↗

APIS combines a gelatin-based material with Mānuka honey and hydroxyapatite. Its published retrospective evaluation is discussed below, including the distinction between time to closure and the proportion of wounds that closed.

APIS product information

04Devices & adjuncts

Ultrasound and negative pressure.

The device portfolio includes contact ultrasound, non-contact ultrasound and negative pressure. Each has its own instructions, treatment workflow and body of evidence.

05Notes on the evidence

Selected clinical studies.

These two papers illustrate why the study design, denominator and endpoint belong next to a reported result. They are selected reading from the broader evidence library.

Microlyte / Prospective pilot / 2020

A bioresorbable matrix in complex chronic wounds

Manning and colleagues evaluated 32 wounds after losses to follow-up. At 12 weeks, 29 had either healed completely or improved significantly. Established care, including debridement or compression when prescribed, continued during the study.

Interpretation: This was an open-label study without a concurrent control group. The combined outcome cannot be read as a complete-closure rate.

What to examine in the paper

Separate complete closure from improvement, note the mixed wound types, and review the care continued alongside the matrix.

Manning SW et al. Wounds. 2020;32(11):309–318.

Read the paper on PubMed

APIS / Retrospective comparison / 2023

A collagen-based sheet in a hospital wound clinic

Rodríguez and colleagues compared 47 chronic wounds: 27 treated with the bioengineered sheet and 20 with standard care. Among wounds that closed, mean time to closure was 7.4 and 14.8 weeks, respectively.

Interpretation: Most wounds in both groups did not close. The retrospective design and the analysis of wounds that closed limit how broadly the time-to-closure finding can be applied.

What to examine in the paper

Review the treatments included in standard care, visit adherence and the reasons some wounds remained open.

Rodríguez I et al. Wounds. 2023;35(1):E35–E38.

Read the paper on PubMed