Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| PLASMACARE/70/Q1-23 | Other Identifier | LKH Feldkirch |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Objective: The study aimed to evaluate the wound healing effects of plasma care®, a cold atmospheric plasma device, in patients with chronic wounds.
Method: A prospective, multicenter, two-arm, randomized, single-blind clinical trial was conducted to compare the effectiveness of plasma care® versus placebo, both combined with best practice wound care.
Chronic wounds present a growing global health challenge, significantly affecting patients' quality of life and imposing high treatment costs. Despite advances in wound care, such as bioactive dressings and specialized medical personnel, effective treatment remains difficult due to the complexity of the wounds and underlying conditions.
Cold atmospheric plasma (CAP) has recently emerged as a promising treatment. CAP is created by ionizing gas with strong electric fields, producing reactive species that stimulate human cell regeneration while also exhibiting strong antibacterial and antifungal effects-even against antibiotic-resistant strains. This dual action makes CAP especially useful for chronic wounds, which are prone to infections.
CAP also benefits wound healing by lowering wound pH. Chronic wounds often have an alkaline environment conducive to bacterial growth, but CAP shifts the pH toward more acidic levels, supporting cell function and antibacterial activity.
Clinical studies have shown CAP significantly improves wound healing by promoting granulation tissue formation, reducing wound size and infection, and alleviating symptoms like redness and itching. CAP has also proven safe, with no mutagenic effects on healthy cells.
Different technologies exist to generate CAP, including Dielectric Barrier Discharge (DBD), Plasma Jet, and Surface Micro Discharge (SMD). The plasma care® device used in this study is based on SMD technology, allowing mobile, gas-free use to treat areas up to 13 cm², with treatment dose determined by application duration.
This study aims to evaluate whether plasma care® provides significantly better healing outcomes in chronic wounds of various types compared to placebo treatment. It also seeks to understand the impact of CAP on wound healing factors such as infection control, pH reduction, and exudate management, alongside patient experiences like pain and tolerability. If successful, this study could establish plasma care® as a valuable new option in chronic wound therapy.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plasma arm | Active Comparator | Treatment of patients with cold atmospheric plasma |
|
| Placebo arm | Placebo Comparator | Placebo control |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cold atmospheric plasma | Device | Treatment of chronic wounds with cold plasma |
| |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Wound area at the end of the study | Size of the wound area (absolute) in cm2 | 42 days |
| Size and time course of the wound area at the end of the study | Average time course in size (absolute) of the wound area in cm2 per visit | 42 days |
| Percentage change in wound area at the end of the study | Wound area as a percentage (from baseline) | 42 days |
| Dynamics of the percentage change in wound area from baseline | Average time course of the percentage in wound area (compared to the initial value) | 42 days |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| pH value | pH measurement by pH meter | 42 days |
| Pain Score | Pain as measured by the VAS Score (1 - 10) | 42 days |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LKH Bregenz | Bregenz | Austria | ||||
| LKH Feldkirch |
Due to austrian legal privacy laws
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Type | Date | Date Unknown |
|---|---|---|
| Release | Aug 7, 2025 | |
| Reset | Aug 28, 2025 | |
| Release | Aug 29, 2025 | |
| Reset | Sep 18, 2025 | |
| Release | Sep 23, 2025 | |
| Reset | Oct 10, 2025 |
Not provided
Not provided
| Release Date | Unrelease Date | Unrelease Date Unknown | Reset Date | MCP Release Number |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 7, 2025 | Aug 28, 2025 | |||
| Aug 29, 2025 |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D014946 | Wound Infection |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D007239 | Infections |
Not provided
Not provided
prospective, multicenter, two-arm, randomized, single-blind, clinical study
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Placebo treatment |
| Device |
Treatment of chronic wounds with the placebo device |
|
| Infection Score | Infection, measured by the PGA - Physician Global Assessment Score ranging from 0 (no signs of infection) to 4 (maximal signs of infection); 1-4 is considered infected | 42 days |
| Tolerability of treatment | no problem (e.g. no maceration, deterioration of the wound, blisters) new development/intensification of erythema (maceration, blisters, exudate congestion) | 42 days |
| Subjective sensation | Subjective sensation as given by the patient: 1 (pleasant feeling), 2 (no specific sensation), 3 (unpleasant), 4 (very unpleasant) | 42 days |
| Feldkirch |
| Austria |
| Sep 18, 2025 |
| Sep 23, 2025 | Oct 10, 2025 |