Introducing MolecuLight i:X ®

Real-time device for Bacterial Fluorescence Imaging & Digital Wound Measurement

  • Point-of-care bacterial detection 1,2
  • Real-time results
  • Use on all wounds, in all wound care settings
  • Safe, portable, non-invasive
  • A comprehensive toolkit for digital wound measurement and documentation3
How Does It Work?

In a darkened room, or using a DarkDrape™, shining a safe violet excitation light (405 nm) on a wound causes wound components (skin, slough, blood, bacteria, etc.) to fluoresce in different colours 1-3. The i:X device displays and captures images of the most informative of these fluorescent colours. Green fluorescence from the skin provides anatomical context. Red and cyan fluorescence are associated with regions of bacterial load of >104 CFU/g 2,3, which is typically moderate-to-heavy growth 1-3, as demonstrated in multiple clinical studies.

Digital Documentation of Area, Length, Width and Depth

Accurate

≥95%

Rapid

Calculates area, length and width in seconds.

Consistent

Reproducible, accurate

Automated

Auto-detection of wound boundaries displayed on image

Facilitates Documentation

For wound monitoring and reimbursement

EMR Import

Images and measurements easily imported into EMR.

Types of Wounds

Bacterial Detection in All Wound Types:

Diabetic Foot Ulcers

DFU was negative for clinical signs and symptoms (CSS) but positive for bacterial fluorescence (red). Microbiology confirmed 1.07 x 107 CFU/g, Enterococcus faecalis, Providencia rettgeri, Staphylococcus aureus, Parvimonas micra

Venous Leg Ulcers

VLU was CSS negative but positive for bacterial fluorescence (red). Microbiology confirmed 5.4 x 107 CFU/g, Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Corynebacterium species.

Venous Leg Ulcers

VLU was CSS negative but positive for bacterial fluorescence (red). Microbiology confirmed 5.4 x 107 CFU/g, Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Corynebacterium species.

Pressure Ulcer

Pressure ulcer was positive for bacterial fluorescence (red). Microbiology confirmed heavy growth of mixed anaerobes.

Burns

Burn wound was positive for bacterial fluorescence (red) in an unexpected location. Microbiology confirmed Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli.

Burns

Burn wound was positive for bacterial fluorescence (red) in an unexpected location. Microbiology confirmed Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli.

Surgical Site Infections

Surgical wound was CSS negative but positive for bacterial fluorescence (cyan). Microbiology confirmed 4.5 x 106 CFU/g, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Corynebacterium species.

Negative Pressure Wound Therapy

Under a negative-pressure wound therapy dressing, bacterial fluorescence (red) was observed. Microbiology confirmed heavy growth of Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis, and Staphylococcus aureus; light growth of Proteus vulgaris.

Negative Pressure Wound Therapy

Under a negative-pressure wound therapy dressing, bacterial fluorescence (red) was observed. Microbiology confirmed heavy growth of Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis, and Staphylococcus aureus; light growth of Proteus vulgaris.

References:
  1. Rennie et al. J Wound Care 2017
  2. Hurley et al. J Wound Care 2019
  3. Raizman et al. J Wound Care 2019