Health resource utilization and cost analysis in Medicare beneficiaries with chronic wounds: outcomes with porcine placental extracellular matrix versus standard of care and other advanced treatments
Publication: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Abstract
Aim: To compare the healthcare resource utilization, spending and clinical outcomes associated with porcine placental extracellular matrix (PPECM [InnovaMatrix® AC, Convatec Triad Life Sciences, LLC, TN, USA]) versus standard of care (SOC) and other advanced treatments (AT) among Medicare Fee-For-Service beneficiaries with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) or venous leg ulcers (VLU). Materials & methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using 100% Medicare Parts A and B administrative claims from October 2021 through December 2024. Treatment episodes for DFU and VLU were identified and categorized as PPECM plus SOC, SOC alone or AT plus SOC. Patients were followed for 6 months after the end of each treatment episode. Outcomes included post-episode healthcare utilization by site of care, per-patient-per-month spending, wound-related complications and amputations. Results: The final study sample included 109,786 eligible DFU patients (117,633 episodes of care; PPECM 0.2%, SOC 95.0%, AT 4.8%) and 53,624 eligible VLU patients (56,498 episodes of care; PPECM 0.1%, SOC 95.5%, AT 4.4%). In DFU, PPECM was associated with significantly lower post-episode utilization in most sites of care compared with SOC, and fewer wound complications including amputations compared with AT. Although total post-episode costs were higher for PPECM than SOC and AT in DFU, PPECM had lower overall cost at specific types of care sites. In VLU, PPECM was associated with significantly fewer visits across most sites of care compared with AT and SOC. PPECM-treated VLU episodes had significantly lower total costs than both SOC and AT. Rates of wound complications and amputations were similar across treatment groups in VLU. Conclusion: Treatment with PPECM demonstrated lower overall post-episode costs compared with SOC and other AT while maintaining safety outcomes, particularly in VLU, suggesting potential value in chronic wound management.
Plain language summary: Comparison of healthcare utilization and spending of porcine placental extracellular matrix versus standard of care and other advanced treatments in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers and venous leg ulcers in the Medicare population
What is this article about?
Diabetic foot ulcers and venous leg ulcers are often hard-to-heal wounds associated with high healthcare costs and health risks, such as infection, amputation and hospitalization. This study compares healthcare utilization and outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries with these hard-to-heal wounds treated with porcine placental extracellular matrix (PPECM) versus other treatments.
What were the results?
PPECM was associated with comparable safety outcomes to standard of care and other advanced treatments. In patients with venous leg ulcers, it was associated with lower overall costs post-wound episode, and in those with diabetic foot ulcers, it was associated with fewer wound complications/amputations.
What do the results mean?
PPECM demonstrated comparable or favorable healthcare utilization and clinical performance across treatment settings compared with standard of care and other advanced treatments for Medicare beneficiaries with hard-to-heal wounds, which supports its potential value in chronic wound management.
Supplementary Material
File (supplementary data.docx)
- Download
- 42.48 KB
References
Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest
1.
Garten A, Nherera LM, Lindsay R. Comparison of single use and traditional negative pressure wound therapy devices in lower extremity ulcers: a US real-world evidence analysis of NetHealth Data. Int. Wound J. 22(9), e70756 (2025).
2.
Serena TE, Garcia L, Neil M et al. Cold atmospheric plasma: a new modality to treat chronic diabetic foot ulcers, venous leg ulcers, and pressure ulcers. IJTR 1(1), doi: (2025) (Epub ahead of print).
3.
Armstrong DG, Tettelbach WH, Chang TJ et al. Observed impact of skin substitutes in lower extremity diabetic ulcers: lessons from the Medicare Database (2015–2018). J. Wound Care 30(Suppl. 7), S5–S16 (2021).
• Demonstrates the benefits of cellular, acellular and matrix-like products (CAMPs; skin substitutes) in lower extremity diabetic ulcers among Medicare beneficiaries.
4.
Tettelbach WH, Driver V, Oropallo A et al. Dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane to treat venous leg ulcers: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J. Wound Care 33(Suppl. 3), S24–S38 (2024).
5.
Armstrong DG, Tan T-W, Boulton AJM, Bus SA. Diabetic foot ulcers: a review. JAMA 330(1), 62 (2023).
• Provides background context for the underlying disease process, severity and risk factors associated with lower extremity amputation.
6.
Tettelbach WH, Driver V, Oropallo A et al. Treatment patterns and outcomes of Medicare enrolees who developed venous leg ulcers. J. Wound Care 32(11), 704–718 (2023).
• Demonstrates the benefits of CAMPs in lower venous leg ulcers among Medicare beneficiaries.
7.
Marcinek B, Levinson J, Nally S et al. Comparative effectiveness of porcine placental extracellular matrix against other cellular, acellular and matrix-like products in diabetic foot ulcers from the Medicare database. J. Comp. Eff. Res. 14(9), e250092 (2025).
• Demonstrates the benefits of porcine placental extracellular matrix (PPECM) for treating diabetic foot ulcers compared to other CAMPs among Medicare beneficiaries.
8.
McDermott K, Fang M, Boulton AJM, Selvin E, Hicks CW. Etiology, epidemiology, and disparities in the burden of diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Care 46(1), 209–221 (2023).
9.
Wu S, Carter M, Cole W et al. Best practice for wound repair and regeneration use of cellular, acellular and matrix-like products (CAMPs). J. Wound Care 32(Suppl. 4b), S1–S31 (2023).
• Provides consensus and significant context for the historic and current use of CAMPs. It provides insights on how CAMPs are classified, their mechanism of action, indications for their use and an overview on the observed clinical benefits.
10.
Vecin NM, Kirsner RS. Skin substitutes as treatment for chronic wounds: current and future directions. Front. Med. 10, 1154567 (2023).
• Discusses evidence regarding the current management and future direction of chronic wounds, providing a review of randomized controlled trials for skin substitutes.
11.
Banerjee J, Lasiter A, Nherera L. Systematic review of cellular, acellular, and matrix-like products and indirect treatment comparison between cellular/acellular and amniotic/nonamniotic grafts in the management of diabetic foot ulcers. Adv. Wound Care 13(12), 639–651 (2024).
12.
Monami M, Scatena A, Ragghianti B et al. Effectiveness of most common adjuvant wound treatments (skin substitutes, negative pressure wound therapy, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, platelet-rich plasma/fibrin, and growth factors) for the management of hard-to-heal diabetic foot ulcers: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for the development of the Italian Guidelines for the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Syndrome. Acta Diabetol. 62(7), 1081–1095 (2024).
13.
Fife C, LeBoutillier B, Taylor C, Marcinek BT. Real-world use and outcomes of hard-to-heal wounds managed with porcine placental extracellular matrix. Cureus 16(12), e76262 (2024).
14.
Demling RH, Niezgoda JA, Haraway D, Mostow EN. Small intestinal submucosa wound matrix and full-thickness venous ulcers: preliminary results. Wounds 16(1), 18–22 (2004).
15.
Mostow EN, Haraway GD, Dalsing M, Hodde JP, King D. Effectiveness of an extracellular matrix graft (OASIS Wound Matrix) in the treatment of chronic leg ulcers: a randomized clinical trial. J. Vasc. Surg. 41(5), 837–843 (2005).
16.
Romanelli M, Dini V, Bertone MS. Randomized comparison of OASIS wound matrix versus moist wound dressing in the treatment of difficult-to-heal wounds of mixed arterial/venous etiology. Adv. Skin Wound Care 23(1), 34–38 (2010).
17.
Massand S, Lewcun JA, LaRosa CA. Clinical and cost efficacy of advanced wound care matrices in the treatment of venous leg ulcers: a systematic review. J. Wound Care 30(7), 553–561 (2021).
18.
Alomairi AA, Alhatlani RA, Alharbi SM et al. Assessing the application and effectiveness of human amniotic membrane in the management of venous and diabetic ulcers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Cureus 16(3), e56659 (2024).
19.
Liden B, Liu T, Regulski M et al. A multicenter retrospective study comparing a polylactic acid CAMP with intact fish skin graft or a collagen dressing in the management of diabetic foot ulcers and venous leg ulcers. Wounds 36(9), 297–302 (2024).
20.
Chesnaye NC, Stel VS, Tripepi G et al. An introduction to inverse probability of treatment weighting in observational research. Clin. Kidney J. 15(1), 14–20 (2022).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2026 The authors. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
History
Received: 25 March 2026
Accepted: 23 June 2026
Published online: 18 August 2026
Keywords:
Topics
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Article Usage
Article usage data only available from February 2023. Historical article usage data, showing the number of article downloads, is available upon request.
Citations
How to Cite
Health resource utilization and cost analysis in Medicare beneficiaries with chronic wounds: outcomes with porcine placental extracellular matrix versus standard of care and other advanced treatments. (2026) Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research. DOI: 10.57264/cer-2026-0063
Export citation
Select the citation format you wish to export for this article or chapter.
