*Zip can only replace the skin closure layer for sutures or staples with incision widths of 5mm or less.
Non-invasive wound closure device able to replace staples, sutures and glue for lacerations and surgical incisions.*
2x better cosmetic appearance
3x faster application
12x greater skin-holding strength
a better patient
• Greater range of motion compared to staples at 2 weeks post-op4
• Easier and faster application compared to staples2,9
• Less painful than staples and sutures5,8
• Better cosmetic appearance1
• Fewer wound complications6
• No added pathways for bacteria10
• Leaves skin barrier intact10
Four different lengths
Zip comes in four different lengths to accommodate the needs of various procedures and specialties. You can also trim, cut, and combine Zip for all types of incisions.
|Zip 4||For closure of incision up to 4 cm in length|
|Zip 8i||For closure of incision up to 8 cm in length|
|Zip 16||For closure of incision up to 16 cm in length|
|Zip 24||For closure of incision up to 24 cm in length|
Incision Isolation Zone
The force distribution system is designed to provide uniform closure forces as well as create an isolation zone around the incision to protect it from patient-induced distraction forces.
The integrated linkage in the Zip device is designed to provide dynamic compression during axial incision extension. Patient’s movement can cause the incision to extend along its length.
The Zip device gently compresses the incision during axial extension, allowing a secure wound closure during the wound healing process.
• 21 peer reviewed study publications, demonstrating clinical and economic benefits
• 30 countries and over 600,000 cases
• 9 issued patents
1. Tanaka, Y. et al. Randomized Study of a New Non-invasive Skin Closure Device for Use After Congenital Heart Operations. Ann Thorac Surg 2016.
2. Lalani, G. G., Schricker, A. A., Salcedo, J., Hebsur, S., HSU, J., Feld, G. and Birgersdotter-Green, U. (2016), Cardiac Device Implant Skin Closure with a Novel Adjustable, Coaptive Tape-Based Device. Pacing and Clinical Electrophysiology. Accepted Author Manuscript. doi:10.1111/pace.129263. Levi K, et al. Mechanics of Wound Closure: Emerging Tape-Based Wound Closure Technology vs. Traditional Methods. Muacevic A, Adler JR, eds. Cureus. 2016;8(10):e827. doi:10.7759/cureus.827.
4. Benner RW, Behrens JP. A Novel Skin Closure Device for Total Knee Arthroplasty: Randomized Controlled Trial versus Staples. The Journal of Knee Surgery (eFirst July 9, 2019) DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1692628.
5. J.H. Ko et al., Do zip-type skin-closing devices show better wound status compared to conventional staple devices in total knee arthroplasty? Iwj.12596
6. Carli AV, Spiro S, Barlow BT, Haas SB. Using a non-invasive secure skin closure following total knee arthroplasty leads to fewer wound complications and no patient home care visits compared to surgical staples. Knee. 2017 Oct;24(5):1221-1226.
7. Insuasty M, Arbelaez W, Avendaño F, Guzman Melo L. “Experience with the use of “supplementary kit for infection prevention” in joint replacement surgery in Military Hospital Central.” Poster session presented at 12th Annual ELCCR – Latin American Meeting of Hip and Knee Surgeons, August 3-6, 2016, Cartagena, Colombia.
8. Fillppa Linden Bergman, Anna Dahl, Christian Schllert, et. al., Non-invasive Zip wound-closure for lacerations in the adult and pediatric A&E, Department of Medicine and function of Emergency Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; March 2019 Poster; Poster presented on March 13-15, 2019 at the Swedish Emergency Medicine Talks Conference in Stockholm, Sweden
9. Gorsulowsky D, Talmor G. A Novel Noninvasive Wound Closure Device as the Final Layer in Skin Closure. Derm Surg: August 2015,Vol 41,Iss 8,p 987–989.
10. Safa B, Belson A, Meschter C, et al. (August 04, 2018) In Vivo Efficacy Study Showing Comparative Advantage of Bacterial Infection Prevention with Zip-type Skin Closure Device vs. Subcuticular Sutures. Cureus 10(8): e3102. doi:10.7759/cureus.3102 - this is an animal study.