Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2010 May;125(5):1362-1371.
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181d62b25.

The SNaP system: biomechanical and animal model testing of a novel ultraportable negative-pressure wound therapy system

Kenton D Fong  1 , Dean Hu, Shaundra Eichstadt, Deepak M Gupta, Moshe Pinto, Geoffrey C Gurtner, Michael T Longaker, H Peter Lorenz
Affiliations
Comparative Study

The SNaP system: biomechanical and animal model testing of a novel ultraportable negative-pressure wound therapy system

Kenton D Fong et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 May.

Abstract

Background: Negative-pressure wound therapy is traditionally achieved by attaching an electrically powered pump to a sealed wound bed and applying subatmospheric pressure by means of gauze or foam. The Smart Negative Pressure (SNaP) System (Spiracur, Inc., Sunnyvale, Calif.) is a novel ultraportable negative-pressure wound therapy system that does not require an electrically powered pump.

Methods: Negative pressure produced by the SNaP System, and a powered pump, the wound vacuum-assisted closure advanced-therapy system (Kinetic Concepts, Inc., San Antonio, Texas), were compared in vitro using bench-top pressure sensor testing and microstrain and stress testing with pressure-sensitive film and micro-computed tomographic scan analysis. In addition, to test in vivo efficacy, 10 rats underwent miniaturized SNaP (mSNaP) device placement on open wounds. Subject rats were randomized to a system activation group (approximately -125 mmHg) or a control group (atmospheric pressure). Wound measurements and histologic data were collected for analysis.

Results: Bench measurement revealed nearly identical negative-pressure delivery and mechanical strain deformation patterns between both systems. Wounds treated with the mSNaP System healed faster, with decreased wound size by postoperative day 7 (51 percent versus 12 percent reduction; p < 0.05) and had more rapid complete reepithelialization (21 days versus 32 days; p < 0.05). The mSNaP device also induced robust granulation tissue formation.

Conclusions: The SNaP System and an existing electrically powered negative-pressure wound therapy system have similar biomechanical properties and functional wound-healing benefits. The potential clinical efficacy of the SNaP device for the treatment of wounds is supported.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Argenta L, Morykwas MJ. Vacuum-assisted closure: A new method for wound control and treatment. Clinical experience. Ann Plast Surg. 1997;38:563–577.
    1. Isago T, Nozaki M, Kikuchi Y, Honda T, Nakazawa H. Effects of different negative pressures on reduction of wounds in negative pressure dressings. J Dermatol. 2003;30:596–601.
    1. Armstrong DG, Lavery LA. Negative pressure wound therapy after partial diabetic foot amputation: A multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2005;366:1704–1710.
    1. Morykwas MJ, Simpson J, Punger K, Argenta A, Kremers L, Argenta J. Vacuum assisted closure: State of basic research and physiologic foundation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;117 (7 Suppl):121S–126S.
    1. Wilkes R, Zhou Y, Cunningham K, Kieswetter K, Haridas B. 3D strain measurement in soft tissue: Demonstration of a novel inverse finite element model algorithm on MicroCT images of a tissue phantom exposed to negative pressure wound therapy. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2009;2:272–287.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources