As someone experienced in chronic wound care, I know that a wound dressing by itself does not produce closures of persistent pressure sores. Practice is to address a constellation of factors contributing to the continuing wound. Competent clinicians will routinely address the following:
pressure on the wound site - must be addressed with pressure relief measures if significant
nutritional assessment - age, low body mass and hydration must be asessed and compensated
local infection has to be addressed
need for wound debridement debridement must be assessed
wound covering must be selected for the specific wound in question; is it a dry wound or exudative. If the latter, the selected wound dressing must be able to manage (absorb) exudate. (Does AC5 do this? From the information reported to date, doesn't seem so.) If the surround skin is friable, the dressing should have minimal adhesive properties.
To imply that a persistent chronic wound can be routinely handled by a 'magic bullet' wound dressing alone is not sound. Such wounds are challenging due to the compelxity of their etiology, with no simple answers available.
Anecdotal reports, possibly by interested clinicans, are not studies and have little significance.
It's one thing to state this AC5 is a useful wound dressing for a particular class of wounds & patients; it is another to represent it as a breakthrough without adequate supporting data.
There are many companies in the wound care space that would be interested in a true breakthrough device for chronic wounds. Where are these companies?
