Hemostatic efficacy of two topical adjunctive hemostats in a porcine spleen biopsy punch model of moderate bleeding.

Topical hemostatic agents have become essential tools to aid in preventing excessive bleeding in surgical or emergency settings and to mitigate the associated risks of serious complications. In the present study, we compared the hemostatic efficacy of SURGIFLO® Hemostatic Matrix Kit with Thrombin (Surgiflo-flowable gelatin matrix plus human thrombin) to HEMOBLAST™ Bellows Hemostatic Agent (Hemoblast-a combination product consisting of collagen, chondroitin sulfate, and human thrombin). Surgiflo and Hemoblast were randomly tested in experimentally induced bleeding lesions on the spleens of four pigs. Primary endpoints included hemostatic efficacy measured by absolute time to hemostasis (TTH) within 5 min. Secondary endpoints included the number of product applications and the percent of product needed from each device to achieve hemostasis. Surgiflo demonstrated significantly higher hemostatic efficacy and lower TTH (p < 0.01) than Hemoblast. Surgiflo-treated lesion sites achieved hemostasis in 77.4% of cases following a single product application vs. 3.3% of Hemoblast-treated sites. On average, Surgiflo-treated sites required 63% less product applications than Hemoblast-treated sites (1.26 ± 0.0.51 vs. 3.37 ± 1.16). Surgiflo provided more effective and faster hemostasis than Hemoblast. Since both products contain thrombin to activate endogenous fibrinogen and accelerate clot formation, the superior hemostatic efficacy of Surgiflo in the porcine spleen punch biopsy model seems to be due to Surgiflo's property as a malleable barrier able to adjust to defect topography and to provide an environment for platelets to adhere and aggregate. Surgiflo combines a flowable gelatin matrix and a delivery system well-suited for precise application to bleeding sites where other methods of hemostasis may be impractical or ineffective.

Evaluation of the Hemostatic Efficacy of Two Powdered Topical Absorbable Hemostats Using a Porcine Liver Abrasion Model of Mild to Moderate Bleeding.

INTRODUCTION: Topical hemostatic agents, used alone or in combination, have become common adjuncts to manage tissue and organ bleeding resulting from trauma and surgical procedures. Oxidized regenerated cellulose (ORC) is one of the most commonly used adjunctive hemostatic agents. The aim of the present study was to compare the hemostatic efficacy of a novel ORC-based product, SURGICEL® Powder Absorbable Hemostat (Surgicel-P) to that of HEMOBLAST™ Bellows (Hemoblast-B), a collagen-based combination powder. METHODS: Using an established porcine liver abrasion model, we randomly tested Surgicel-P and Hemoblast-B in 60 experimental lesion sites (30 per product tested). Primary endpoints included hemostatic efficacy measured by absolute time to hemostasis (TTH) within 5 minutes. We also examined number of applications required to achieve hemostasis, and sustained hemostasis following saline irrigation of test sites that achieved hemostasis. RESULTS: Surgicel-P demonstrated significantly higher hemostatic efficacy and lower TTH (p < 0.01) than Hemoblast-B. Surgicel-P-treated lesion sites achieved hemostasis in 73.3% of cases following one product application vs. 3.3% of Hemoblast-B-treated sites. Of all sites that were assessed, hemostasis was achieved and sustained following irrigation at 93.3% of Surgicel-P-treated sites vs. 50.0% of Hemoblast-B-treated sites. The average number of Surgicel-P applications per site was 51% lower than the average number of applications used for Hemoblast-B. CONCLUSION: Surgicel-P provided more effective and sustained hemostasis and faster TTH than Hemoblast-B. Surgicel-P represents a novel clinical alternative to provide adjunctive control of diffuse mild and moderate bleeding. Surgicel-P combines an ORC powder formulation and a delivery system in a device that is particularly useful for application on large surfaces and difficult-to-access anatomical locations where application of other forms of topical hemostats may be impractical.