52 registered studies, 23 active — and for the first time, some are big enough to settle something.
From ClinicalTrials.gov, hand-filtered to studies genuinely describing a plasma discharge. The notable ones: Plasma Therapy for Diverse Wounds (1,000 participants), Plasma Therapy for Scar Management (800), and a 494-patient comparison against standard care in diabetic foot and venous leg ulcers. Plus 220-participant trials in acne vulgaris and tinea pedis, both recruiting since July 2025.
Results. These are targets, not achieved enrolment, and most report years from now. But three of these carry more participants between them than the entire published human evidence base to date.
“The field is about to get real answers” is legitimate and requires no claim.
With a 494-patient comparison and two studies over 800, chronic wounds gets settled — one way or the other — within a few years.
No large oncology efficacy trial is among them.
This is an extract. The full picture is in The Evidence Map — or start at the library index.
Cold Plasma Research Library. Compiled from Europe PMC and ClinicalTrials.gov, September 2026 — 4,846 cold plasma papers, 662 on plasma-activated water, 52 registered trials. Counts are title-restricted and therefore floors, not ceilings: a low number means barely anyone has made this their subject, not that nobody has ever looked.
These pages describe published research on a technology. They do not describe or endorse any product, they are not medical advice, and nothing here should be used to decide about treating a health condition. Speak to a qualified clinician about anything that matters.