PICO OBGYN | Possible with PICO

PICO Single Use Negative Pressure Wound Therapy System (sNPWT) significantly reduces the likelihood of surgical site infections (SSls), complications (SSCs) and the financial burden following cesarean section compared to PREVENA™ in real-world use.¹

Reduction in the odds of developing superficial surgical site infections^**1

The PICO System is proven to reduce the risk of surgical site infections (SSIs)²* — which enables early mother and baby bonding, prompt discharge, and positive impacts on the patient’s emotional wellbeing.³

(p=0.017)

Reduction in the odds of developing superficial surgical site infections^**1

(p=0.017)

$728,000 lower per 1000 patients

cost-savings per 1000 patients^**†1

In the first large-scale study directly comparing differing pressure levels in sNPWT devices found superior outcomes with PICO sNPWT at 30–90 days.¹

(p<0.05^**1)

70% down

Reduction in the odds of developing seroma^**1

The PICO System helps reduce the odds of developing seroma, protecting mom and allowing more time to bond.¹

(p=0.050^**1)

38% down

Reduction in the odds of developing dehicence^**1

Patients who received the PICO System after a C-section were significantly less likely to develop dehiscence, compared to other sNPWT.^**1

(p=0.0050^**1)

Download the EIF

Improve patient satisfaction

Patients using the PICO System after a C-section were significantly more satisfied with the appearance of scars 12 months after surgery than those using standard dressings.^*4

Review the details

Kristie’s Story

How It Works

C-Section Application

References:

Vilkins A, Nherera L, Searle R, Welsh T. Prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy for caesarean section: a real world evidence study. Wounds. 2025;37(4):152–157.
Saunders C, Nherera LM, Horner A, Trueman P. Single-Use negative-pressure wound therapy versus conventional dressings for closed surgical incisions: systematic literature review and meta-analysis. BJS Open. 2021;0(0):1 - 8.
Bullough L, Burns S, Timmons J, Truman P, Megginson S. Reducing c-section wound complications. The Clinical Services Journal. 2015:2-6.
Hyldig N, Möller S, Joergensen JS, Bille C. Clinical evaluation of scar quality following the use of prophylactic negative pressure wound therapy in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery: a trial-based scar evaluation. Ann Plast Surg. 2020 Jul 10. [Epub ahead of print]. Available at: Annals of Plastic Surgery
Bullough L and Wilkinson D. Changing wound care protocols to reduce post-operative caesarean section complications. Presented at Wounds UK, Harrogate, 2012.
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists 2013. RCOG statement on emergency caesarean section rates [ONLINE].
Michelle J.K. et all. Births: Final Data for 2020. National Vital Statistics Report. Vol. 70, 17. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr70/nvsr70-17.pdf.

*Compared with standard dressings in a woman with pre-pregnancy BMI ≥ 30

**Significant odds reductions in clinical outcomes were observed for patients receiving PICO sNPWT versus those receiving PREVENATM following C-section.

***Pre-pregnancy BMI ≥ 30

†Estimated using unadjusted data.