• All fields are required unless indicated optional.

  • 3M takes your privacy seriously. 3M and its authorized third parties will use the information you provided in accordance with our Privacy Policy to send you communications which may include promotions, product information and service offers. Please be aware that this information may be stored on a server located in the U.S. If you do not consent to this use of your personal information, please do not use this system.

  • SUBMIT

Our apologies...

An error has occurred while submitting. Please try again later...

Thank you!

Your form was submitted successfully

Image of a male healthcare professional wearing a stethoscope.
Start Smart with
3M™ Veraflo™ Therapy

Early initiation of Veraflo Therapy can potentially improve clinical outcomes
and reduce costs versus standard of care.

Help get patients home sooner.

Can the timing of 3M™ Veraflo™ Therapy initiation help impact outcomes?

Delayed healing and wound complications are significant care and cost burdens. Wound complications and their associated costs can increase when treatment is delayed. A retrospective analysis of a national, all-payer hospital database of 514 patients (257 per group)¹ who received Veraflo Therapy in 2019 suggests that early use of Veraflo Therapy (within 1 day of NPWT application) compared to late initiation of Veraflo Therapy (within 2-7 days) can help improve clinical outcomes and reduce the cost of care.

Patients with Day 1 initiation of Veraflo Therapy reported:

  • Calendar icon

    4.4 days shorter average duration of the NPTW therapy (7.0 vs 11.4¹)

  • Calendar icon

    2.9 days shorter inpatient stay (13.4 vs. 16.3 p<0.0001¹)

  • Hospital icon

    Fewer wound-related readmissions at 30 days (6 vs 16; p=0.0293) and 60 days (10 vs 24; p=0.0130¹)

Note: Early initiation of Veraflo Therapy was considered on patients who received it as their initial negative pressure treatment or within one day of NPWT application, and late initiation for patients that received Veraflo Therapy within 2-7 days of initial NPWT. ​

Read the article about the immediate initiation of
3M™ Veraflo™ Therapy.


What is Veraflo™ Therapy?

Veraflo Therapy combines the benefits of V.A.C.® Therapy with an instillation therapy option that features automated volumetric delivery of topical wound cleansing solutions and a programmable soak feature, which allows the solution to dwell in the wound for thorough contact.

  • Hand cleaning icon
    Cleanse

    Delivers topical wound solutions that dwell in the wound to help dilute and solubilise infectious material².

  • Wound dressing icon
    Remove

    Removes solubilised wound debris and infectious materials under negative pressure to manage bioburden³.

  • Icon with a cross sign inside a heart
    Promote

    Promotes granulation tissue formation and perfusion to prepare the wound for closure⁴.


3M™ Veraflo™ Therapy has demonstrated positive clinical outcomes over standard of care, including traditional NPWT⁵.

A systematic review of comparative studies and meta-analysis⁵ evaluated the performance of Veraflo Therapy versus control in 13 studies and 720 patients with various wound types. Results of the analysis revealed Veraflo Therapy delivered significant advantages over standard of care.

  • Icon showing a downward arrow

    >30% fewer surgical debridements⁵,

    (1.77 debridements vs 2.69, p=0.008)

  • Icon showing 2 times more

    Wounds were 2.39 times more likely to close⁵,

    (p=0.01)

  • Calendar icon

    >50% reduced length of therapy⁵,

    9.88 days vs 21.8 days, p=0.02)

  • Bacteria icon

    Reduced bacterial count from baseline⁵

    (Odds were 4.4 times greater p=0.003)

  • a  Image Alt Text: Icon of a metre showing speed
  • Ready for closure almost twice as fast

    (7.88 days vs 14.36 days, p=0.003)


Use of 3M™ Veraflo™ Therapy can potentially reduce costs versus standard of care.

Based upon the meta-analysis by Allen Gabriel, MD et al. an economic model⁵ was developed to compare the cost of using Veraflo Therapy to traditional wound care options, including 3M™ V.A.C.® Therapy. Despite the higher therapy cost of Veraflo Therapy, the reduction in therapy time and required OR visits resulted in a potential savings of 50%, or up to $33,338 per patient⁷.

Graph from  the meta-analysis by Allen Gabriel, MD et al. showing the potential cost savings while using 3M™ Veraflo™ Therapy.

Note: The model uses select study data to provide an illustration of estimates of costs for use. This model is an illustration and not a guarantee of actual individual costs, savings, outcomes, or results. Savings may not be typical and may vary.


Resource Library

Find application videos, clinical compendiums, case studies and more in our resource library.​

Case Studies

Application Videos

Application Videos

  • Thumbnail image for the video 'How it works – 3M Veraflo Therapy with Cleanse Choice'
    How it works – 3M Veraflo Therapy with Cleanse Choice
  • Thumbnail image for VAC Veraflo Smart Instill Feature Buttonology Video
    VAC Veraflo Smart Instill Feature Buttonology Video
  • Thumbnail image for Veraflo Cleanse Choice Dressing Application Video
    Veraflo Cleanse Choice Dressing Application Video
  • Thumbnail image for VAC Veraflo Application Video
    VAC Veraflo Application Video

Testimonials

Testimonials

  • Thumbnail image for 'Dr Matthews Testimonial video'
  • Dr Matthews Testimonial video

Clinical Evidence

Interested to learn more about 3M™ Veraflo™ Therapy?


View all related products​


1. Collinsworth AW, Griffin LP. The effect of timing of instillation therapy on outcomes and costs for patients receiving negative pressure wound therapy. Wounds. 2022;34(11):269-275. doi:10.25270/wnds/22013
2. Teot L, Boissiere F, Fluieraru S. Novel foam dressing using negative pressure wound therapy with instillation to remove thick exudate. Int Wound J. 2017;14(5):842-848.
3. Brinkert D, Mazen A, Naud M, Maire N, Trial C, Teot L. Negative pressure wound therapy with saline instillation: 131 patient case series. Int Wound J. 2013;10 Suppl 1:56-60
4. Gupta S, Gabriel A, Lantis J, Teot L. Clinical recommendations and practical guide for negative pressure wound therapy with instillation. Int Wound J. 2016;13(2):159-174.
5. Gabriel A, Camardo M, O' Rorke E, Gold R, Kim PJ. Effects of Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy With Instillation versus Standard of Care in Multiple Wound Types: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2021; 147; 1S-1.
6. Camardo, Mark. “Veraflo Meta-Analysis Standardized and Non-Standardized Means.”, 3M Internal Report, San Antonio, Texas, 2020.
7. Kim PJ, Lookess S, Bongards C, Griffin LP, Gabriel A. Economic model to estimate cost of negative pressure wound therapy with instillation vs control therapies for hospitalised patients in the United States, Germany, and United Kingdom. Int Wound J. 2021;1–7

KCI Medical Australia Pty Ltd, Level 3, Building A, 1 Rivett Road, North Ryde NSW 2113
Ph: 1300 524 822