Table 1.

Comparison between clinical studies done on Aquacel Ag^®

Authors and references	Study type	Number patients	Clinical background	Aquacel Ag® versus	Endpoint/outcome	Results
Caruso28	Prospective Phase II	22	Partial thickness burns	Non-comparative	Clinical performance	Positive re-epithelialization rate, ease of use, comfort, flexibility, conformability
Lohana33	Prospective Phase II	22	Pediatric partial thickness burns	Non-comparative	Clinical performance	Good wound healing, reduced pain, ease of use, comfortable
Coutts29	Case series	30	Chronic wounds	Non-comparative	Wound healing	Decreased size, exudate, and maceration, increased granulation tissue
Vanscheidt39	Prospective	15	Chronic leg ulcer	Non-comparative	Clinical performance	Reduction in pain, wound slough, and size, improved wound healing
Paddock36	Retrospective	38	Pediatric partial thickness burns	Silver sulfadiazine	Cost-effectiveness	Reduced hospital costs, greater cost-effectiveness
Saba37	Retrospective	10	Pediatric partial thickness burns	Xeroform gauze with bacitracin zinc	Clinical performance	Reduced in-hospital stay and pain, shorter re-epithelialization
Caruso27	Prospective, Randomized	42	Partial thickness burns	Silver sulfadiazine	Cost-effectiveness	Less pain and burning, fewer dressing changes, greater cost-effectiveness
Lohsiriwat34	Prospective, Randomized	11	Split-thickness skin graft donor sites	Paraffin gauze	Clinical performance	Reduced pain and faster re-epithelialization
Jurczak31	Prospective, Randomized	35	Acute surgical and traumatic wounds	Povidone-iodine gauze	Clinical performance	Better pain management, comfort, exudate handling, and ease of use
Jude30	Prospective, Randomized	67	Diabetic foot ulcers	Calcium alginate	Wound healing	More reduction in ulcer depth and better infection control