BTM has many advantages in comparison to other available dermal...

BTM has many advantages in comparison to other available dermal substitutes. Current literature demonstrates that BTM possesses a superior resistance, which in turn decreases risks of poor patient outcomes, skin graft demise, and inadequate aesthetic results. One proposed reason for this advantage
is BTM’s characteristic synthetic nature, which, by definition, lacks a food source for bacteria. Additionally, BTM is less expensive and more cost-effective, making it the preferred choice in many large area wounds. Further, BTM is designed to minimize wound contraction, which is a favorable
quality when considering aesthetic scar outcome. Some hypothesize that the foam cells within the BTM “compartmentalize the wound into a multitude of smaller wounds (the size of which is determined by the pore structures),” which reduces contraction and scar thickness. Finally, due to its synthetic nature, BTM is the preferred option for dermal template for patients who decline allogenic cadaver or xenografic animal products due to personal or religious beliefs.

@whytee
There's a bit in there about NPWT such as: The authors hypothesized the sponges under vacuum absorb and clear pathogenic species from the wound bed, thereby resulting in less bacterial growth. The role of NPWT is a growing sector of literature, and further research is indicated.

Interestingly one of the authors is a consultant for Kerecis.