Visible efficacy

  • Description
  • Benefits
  • Indications
  • In Practice
  • FAQs
  • Evidence
  Download product information

Flexible lipido-colloid contact layer

Promoting healing and improving patients’ quality of life:

 

Pain-free and atraumatic dressing removal

A major benefit of TLC healing matrix (Technology Lipido-Colloid) is the non-adherence of the dressing allowing trauma-free removal from newly-formed tissue with no pain for the patient.

urgotul-description-3

Composition

UrgoTul is a flexible contact layer with TLC healing matrix comprised of:

  • A conformable polyester mesh impregnated with hydrocolloid and petroleum jelly particles.

urgotul-description2

 

Mode of action

When in contact with wound exudate, UrgoTul gels and creates a moist environment, promoting healing. UrgoTul stimulates fibroblast proliferation and ensures non-adherence and pain-free dressing changes.


This website is an international website. Some products or sizes can therefore be unavailable in some countries. For more information, please contact us.

Benefits for the wound

  • Optimal wound healing
  • Epidermal regeneration
  • Moist wound healing
  • Fibroblast proliferation
  • No adherence to the wound (no damage to newly formed tissue)
  • Protection and improvement of surrounding skin
  • Can be left in place for up to 7 days* – fewer dressing changes reducing healing disturbance
  • High conformability to the wound bed

benefits-for-professionnalBenefits for health professionals

  • Optimal reconstruction of dermis and epidermis
  • Easy to apply (stays in place when applied)
  • Easy to remove with pain-free dressing change
  • Can be left in place for up to 7 days* – fewer dressing changes
  • Improved patient quality of life
  • Can be used in cavity wounds
  • Can be used under compression
  • Efficacy clinically proven

benefits-for-patientBenefits for patients

  • No adherence to the wound: pain-free dressing changes
  • Well tolerated
  • Very conformable: stretches to move with the body
  • Improved patient comfort
  • Can be left in place for up to 7 days* – fewer dressing changes

*dependent on wound condition and protocol (when prescribed with a compression bandage system for venous leg ulcers)

UrgoTul is indicated for the treatment of non to low exuding wounds in the epithelialisation stage (burns, abrasions, traumatic wounds, post-operative wounds, leg ulcers, pressure ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers, epidermolysis bullosa).

Contraindications

None

 

Instructions for use

  • Clean the wound as per local protocol and rinse with normal saline.
  • If an antiseptic is first used, rinse the wound thoroughly with saline solution before applying UrgoTul.
  • Dry the surrounding skin carefully.
  • UrgoTul can be cut using sterile scissors to fit the dressing size to the wound if necessary.
  • Using the tabs, remove the protective films.
  • Apply UrgoTul to the wound.
  • Cover UrgoTul with a secondary dressing suitable for the location and level of wound exudate.
  • Secure the dressing in place with a suitable bandage, adhesive tape, or an elasticated tubular bandage. Apply a compression bandage when prescribed.
  • UrgoTul should be changed every 2 to 4 days (up to 7 days*) depending on the level of exudate and the clinical condition of the wound.

*dependent on wound condition and protocol (when prescribed with a compression bandage system for venous leg ulcers)

Precautions for use

  • As UrgoTul can adhere to surgical gloves (latex), it is recommended that gloves should be moistened with normal saline to facilitate handling of the dressing.
  • If clinical signs of local infection are noted, treatment can be changed to an antibacterial dressing of Urgo range (such as UrgoTul S.Ag/SSD/UrgoTul Ag/Silver), dependent on clinical judgment.
  • In case of deep, anfractuous or fistula wound, a section of the dressing should be left visible to enable easy removal.
  • Discard any unused parts of the dressing.
  • Check that the sterility protector is intact before use.
  • Single-use, individual and sterile dressing (ionising radiation); re-using a single-use product may lead to risks of infection.
  • Do not re-sterilise the dressing.

Sizes availableURGOTUL 10x10

  • 5×5 cm
  • 10×10 cm
  • 10×12 cm
  • 15×15 cm
  • 15×20 cm
  • 10×40 cm

 


This website is an international website. Some products or sizes can therefore be unavailable in some countries. For more information, please contact us.

Product

What is UrgoTul?

UrgoTul is a flexible contact layer with TLC, comprised of a conformable polyester mesh impregnated with polymers and CarboxyMethyl Cellulose (hydrocolloid).

How does UrgoTul work?

When in contact with wound exudate, UrgoTul gels and creates a moist environment, promoting healing. UrgoTul stimulates fibroblast proliferation and ensures non-adherence and pain-free dressing changes.

What is the role of fibroblasts?

During wound healing, fibroblasts migrate within the wound area, proliferate and synthesize the extracellular matrix to form granulation tissue (newly formed tissue).
Fibroblasts are then differentiated in situ into myofibroblasts which bring the edges of the wound together due to their contractile properties.
TLC stimulates fibroblast proliferation which supports the healing process.

Indications

When should I use UrgoTul?

UrgoTul is indicated for the treatment of non to low exuding wounds during the epithelialisation stage.

Can I use UrgoTul on infected wounds?

If clinical signs of local infection are noted, treatment can be changed to an antibacterial dressing of the Urgo range (such as UrgoTul S.Ag/SSD/UrgoTul Ag/Silver), dependent on clinical judgment.

Can I use UrgoTul during the desloughing stage?

Yes, however, UrgoClean is the recommended treatment option for desloughing.

Can I use UrgoTul with a gel?

Yes, it can be combined with a hydrogel.

What are the contraindications of UrgoTul?

There are no contraindications to date.

Use

UrgoTul can adhere to gloves. How should I avoid this?

It is recommended to moisten the gloves with normal saline and to use the protective wings to facilitate application.

cutting-dressing-guide

Cutting Guide

Can I cut UrgoTul?

Yes.

How can I secure UrgoTul?

Cover UrgoTul with a secondary dressing suitable for the location and level of wound exudate. Secure the dressing in place with a suitable bandage, adhesive tape, or an elasticated tubular bandage. Apply a compression bandage when prescribed.

Can I use UrgoTul under compression?

Yes.

When should I change UrgoTul?

UrgoTul should be changed every 2 to 4 days (up to 7 days*) depending on the level of exudate and the clinical condition of the wound.

*dependent on wound condition and protocol (when prescribed with a compression bandage system for venous leg ulcers)

Can I leave UrgoTul in place and only change the secondary dressing?

Yes, UrgoTul can be left in place for several days, in order to reduce healing disturbance.

JWC_20_4_180_185_Meaume_web

JWC_136_Letouze_6pp_web

JWC_139_Oct_Burtonp371-3_web

Use of a new, flexible lipidocolloid dressing on acute and chronic wounds: results of a clinical study

Using a new lipidocolloid dressing in paediatric wounds: results of French and German clinical studies

An evaluation of non-adherent wound-contact layers for acute traumatic and surgical wounds

Download Download Download
JWCNovBlanchet-Bardonp490_web JWCMayBernardp215-220_web BJN_132_Urgotul-smith-web

Using Urgotul dressing for the management of epidermolysis bullosa skin lesions

Stimulation of the proliferation of human dermal fibroblasts in vitro by a lipidocolloid dressing A clinical evaluation of Urgotul® to treat acute and chronic wounds
Download Download Download
BJN-136-Smith-J-6pp-web Etude_MAPP Urgo_Review_resize_A4_web

Evaluation of Urgotul® plus K-Four® compression for venous leg ulcers

The importance of pain reduction through dressing selection in routine wound management: the MAPP study Supporting evidence-based practice: a clinical review of TLC technology

Download

Download Download
     

The effectiveness of using a lipido-colloid dressing for patients with traumatic digital wounds

Ma K.K. et al, Clinical Nursing Research, Volume 15, Number 2, May 2006.

This study compares the effect of a daily gauze dressing with that of a lipidocolloid dressing on the time taken to make up the dressing and efficacy of the management of traumatic digital wounds. This is a randomized controlled trial of 28 patients (16 experimental and 12 control) with injuries to their fingers and loss of tissue. The patients in the experimental and control groups were given a lipido-colloid dressing and a daily gauze dressing, respectively. The patient’s wounds were assessed in terms of the size of the wound and the time it took for the wound to heal. The findings showed that patients in the experimental group had a faster recovery time from the healing of their wound than the control group (p=.024). The findings can help to establish an evidence-based practice in the management of traumatic digital wounds in clinical settings.

 

The use of Urgotul in the treatment of partial thickness burns and split-thickness skin graft donor sites: a prospective control study

Tan PWW. Et al, Int Wound J 2009; 6:295–300

The use of paraffin-impregnated gauze for burns and skin graft donor sites is commonly associated with wound adherence with consequent pain and trauma upon removal. This prospective clinical study was performed to evaluate a new class of lipido-colloid dressings (Urgotul) in promoting healing and in reducing tissue adherence. In a 6-month period, 25 consecutive patients were recruited. Two separate burn or donor sites on each patient were dressed with tulle-gras (TG) or Urgotul and covered with standard secondary dressings. Objective assessment of wounds by two reviewers, and patients’ subjective assessments were recorded. Twenty-three (92%) patients were followed up for a mean of 3 months. Mean time to complete epithelialisation was 9.6 and 11.9 days for the Urgotul and TG sites respectively (P < 0.05). Bleeding was seen in 52% of Urgotul sites compared with 100% of the TG sites at first dressing change (P < 0.05). Patients reported ‘moderate pain’ during dressing change in 22% and 57% in the Urgotul and TG groups respectively (P < 0.05), with 35% of TG sites being ‘very painful’ requiring extra analgesia. We found that compared with TG, Urgotul was associated with faster epithelialisation, less pain and trauma (bleeding) during dressing changes.

 

Use of topical negative pressure with a lipido-colloid dressing: results of a clinical evaluation

Teot L. et al, Journal of Wound Care, Vol 15, No8, September 2006

  • Objective: To evaluate the protection and acceptability of Urgotul wound dressing in the local management of acute or chronic wounds receiving topical negative pressure (TNP) therapy.
  • Method: This was a prospective multicentre non-comparative open-label trial. At each dressing change the investigating physician clinically evaluated and photographed the wound. Planimetric measurement was undertaken and wound depth was assessed at the start and the end of the treatment. Follow-up was undertaken until deemed clinically unnecessary by the investigator.
  • Results: Sixty-six patients were included (42 acute wounds and 24 chronic wounds) and followed up for an average of 17 days. Dressing changes were deemed entirely painless in 52% of cases (compared with 18% at baseline) and pain between two consecutive dressing changes was absent in 66% of cases (34% at baseline). Removal of the TNP-interface dressing combination was considered “very easy” or “easy” in 94% of cases and adherence to the wound was recorded as “absent” in 88%. On average, the dressings were changed every 3.8 ± 1.1 days (all wounds were considered), and wound area and depth were reduced by 19% and 54% respectively by the end of the follow-up period.
  • Conclusion: Use of the interface dressing in combination with TNP substantially reduced the pain caused by dressing changes. It therefore makes more acceptable the use of this technique, which aims to optimise the management of wounds that are sometimes considered to be in a therapeutic impasse.

 

Evaluation of a lipido-colloid wound dressing in the local management of leg ulcers

Meaume S. et al, Journal of Wound care, Vol 14, No 7, July 2005.

  • Objective: To evaluate the efficacy, tolerance and acceptability of Urgotul and DuoDERM E dressings in the local management of venous or mixed-aetiology leg ulcers.
  • Method: This was a prospective multicentre randomised phase IV clinical trial conducted open-label in parallel groups. It involved 20 investigating centres, including hospital dermatology and vascular medicine departments, and private practices. Dermatologists and angiologists/phlebologists took part.
    Subjects were adultst, non-immunosuppressed patients presenting with non-infected, non malignant leg ulcer of predominantly venous origin (ABPI > 0.8). Ulcers were between 4cm² and 40cm² in size, with granulation tissue covering more than 50% of their surface area. Ulcer duration ranged from three to 18 months. Patients were followed-up by the investigating physician for eight weeks on a weekly basis; this included clinical examination, wound area tracing and photographs. Nurses (hospital or visiting) assessed exudate volume and clinical appearance at dessing changes.
  • Results: Ninety-one patients were included: 47 in the Urgotul group and 44 in the DuoDERM E group. Baseline patient demographic data and wound characteristics were comparable in the two groups. After eight weeks of treatment wound surface area had reduced by a mean of 61.3% in the Urgotul group and 52.1% in the DuoDERM E group (NS); dressings were changed more frequently in the DuoDERM E group (2.54 ± 0.57 times per week versus 2.31 ± 0.45 in the Urgotul group, p=0.047). Thirty -three local adverse events were recorded in 27 patients: 10 in the Urgotul group and 23 in the DuoDERM E group ( p=0.039). Nurses reported better acceptability for the Urgotul dressings, based on pain on removal, maceration and odour (p<0.0001).
  • Conclusion: Both dressings showed similar efficacy for the local treatment of veinous leg ulcers. Nevertheless, medical and nursing staff reported better tolerance and acceptability of the Urgotul dressing.

 

Critical analysis of an observational evaluation of diabetic foot wounds treated with Urgotul

Ehrler S. et al, Journal des Plaies et Cicatrisation, No 58, May 2007.

This multicentre, observational evaluation included 35 diabetic foot wounds treated locally with the neutral Urgotul interface, the aim being to evaluate the efficacy, local tolerance and acceptability of Urgotul (ease of application and removal of the dressing, adherence to the wound, pain at removal, state of skin around the wound). The mean age of patients was 68.1 years. 49% of them were followed as outpatients. 37% of the patients presented with arteritis of the lower limbs and 23% had undergone a revascularisation procedure. This clinical evaluation of Urgotul in the management of diabetic foot wounds at the granulation and then epidermization stages demonstrated :

  • complete healing of the lesions in 13 of the 35 patients (37.1%)
  • a 54.8% reduction in the surface affected within a mean period of 45 days, while the mean history of the wounds was 5.2 months and in 64% of cases the wound was perforating.

The skin around the wound was initially healthy in only 21.7% of patients, and this improved in all cases, except in the presence of hyperkeratosis (3 patients). Tolerance of the dressing was excellent. Only one adverse event was reported (erysipelas of the right medial malleous). Removal of the Urgotul dressing was deemed very easy or easy in 94.2% of cases, and pain during removal was scored as absent or minimal in 87.7% of cases. The results of this evaluation confirmed existing data on the efficacy and tolerability of the neutral Urgotul interface.

 

Urgotul : a novel non adherent lipido-colloid dressing

Meaume S. et al, British Journal of Nursing, Vol 11, No 16, 2002.

Urgotul belongs to a new class of non-adherent dressings: the lipidocolloid dressings. It is composed of an open weave polyester mesh impregnated with hydrocolloid polymers dispersed within petrolatum. The first clinical trial data are presented. Efficacy and safety were evaluated in a multicentre non-comparative trial involving 92 patients treated to healing or up to 4 weeks. Adult outpatients with acute wounds (n=34), leg ulcers (n=24), other chronic wounds (n=14) or with second-degree burns (n=20) were included. Results showed 32.4% (n=11) of the acute wounds, 12.5% (n=3) of the leg ulcers and 14.3% (n=2) of the other chronic wounds completely healed before 4 weeks. Surface areas decreased on average by 76.4%, 63.5% and 44.2% at study endpoint respectively. For burns, 19 patients healed (95%) within 5-19 days.

A total of 771 dressing changes were performed during the course of the study. Dressing application was considered as easy or very easy in 90% or more of the changes and there was no difficulty in removing the dressing in about 95% of the cases. Safety was good with five reports of a transitory local adverse event, probably dressing-related, being observed. Two patients (2.2%) prematurely stopped treatment because of moderate periwound erythema. Urgotul is a highly promising new dressing which is currently undergoing further, comparative, clinical evaluations.

Last update : November 23, 2017