Analysis of the hemostatic potential of modern topical sealants on arterial and venous anastomoses: an experimental porcine study.

One of the widely accepted adjunctive agents in the variety of surgical modalities are sealants. Our study aim was to compare four commonly used modern sealants in a standardized experimental setting to assess their feasibility, and hemostatic efficacy in vascular anastomosis. Forty landrace pigs (weight: 24.7 ± 3.8 kg) were randomized into the control (n = 8) and four sealant groups; TachoSil® (n = 8), Tissucol Duo® (n = 8), Coseal® (n = 8), and FloSeal® (n = 8). After doing a portal vein end-to-end anastomosis as well as stitches of aortic incision, the sealants were applied on anastomotic site. The control group was left intact. In portal vein anastomosis, the sealants led to a complete hemostasis significantly better than control group. The mean of blood loss was also significantly reduced. In successful subgroups, there was a difference in the mean-time to reach complete hemostasis ranging from 15 s in Coseal® to 76 s in FloSeal® group (p < 0.05). In aortotomy experiments, except Tissucol Due®, which had insufficient hemostasis, other sealants led to a complete hemostasis. The mean blood loss was significantly reduced in sealants groups as well. The four sealants are effective in reducing the suture-hole bleeding in portal vein anastomosis. However, the hemostatic potential is heterogeneous among sealants. This means that "one-size-fits-all" approach is not appropriate for application of sealants in diversity of vascular surgery and it should be based on the type and the severity of injury and the structure of tissue. Comparison of hemostasis efficacy of four modern sealants (TachoSil®, Tissucol Duo®, Coseal®, and FloSeal®) in vascular anastomosis in porcine model. The figures below show the total blood loss (g) in the control and sealant groups after aortotomy (left) and portal vein anastomosis (right). The mean of blood loss decreased significantly by the usage of sealants in both experiment groups as compared to control group (*: p < 0.05; sealant groups vs. control group). 1. The right column shows the mean of blood loss (g) in all experiments in each group. 2. The middle column presents the subgroup with unsuccessful hemostasis at the end of observation time (Tmax = 20 sec. for aortotmy and 300 sec. for portal vein anastomosis). 3. The left column shows mean of total blood loss in subgroups with successful hemostasis during observation time (20 sec for aortotomy and 300 sec for portal vein).

Mechanical strength of biliary defect closure after topical sealing: Comparison of four sealants in a porcine model.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Biliary leakage is a potential complication of liver resection and is still a concern. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of four routinely used sealants in preventing bile leakage under pressure from an induced perforation of the gallbladder in a porcine model. METHODS: Forty Landrace pigs were randomly assigned to one of five groups. These included a control group (n = 8) and one group each for the sealants TachoSil®, TissuCol Duo®, Coseal®, and FloSeal® (n = 8 per group). In the control group, the perforation was left unsealed. To evaluate the biliostatic potential of the sealants, we measured the pressure that was needed to induce leakage (mmHg) and the gallbladder volume (cc) at the time of leakage in each group. RESULTS: A significantly higher mean pressure was required to induce leakage in the sealant groups compared with the control group. However, the biliostatic effects were heterogeneous among the sealant groups. Sealants with the highest to lowest effectiveness were TachoSil, Coseal, TissuCol, and FloSeal. The mean gallbladder volume at the time of leakage also varied between sealant groups. CONCLUSION: Biliostatic properties are markedly improved by the use of modern sealants compared with using no sealant. However, the advantages and disadvantages of using sealants should be carefully considered in each clinical situation. The effectiveness of the sealants should be evaluated in chronic and clinical studies.

Hemostatic efficiency of modern topical sealants: Comparative evaluation after liver resection and splenic laceration in a swine model.

Parenchymal transection during hepatobiliary surgery can disrupt small vasculature or bile ducts, which could be managed difficultly. Sealants are helpful tools to achieve better hemostasis. The aim of this study is to analyze the hemostatic efficiency of four modern sealants in a porcine model. In this study, 40 landrace pigs were assigned equally to the control (without sealant) and four sealant groups. Standardized liver resection and splenic lesions were performed and left without using sealant (control) or treated with one of the following sealants: TachoSil® , Tissucol Duo® , Coseal® , and FloSeal® . We measured relative and absolute bleeding times (seconds) as well as total blood loss (g) in a maximum observation time of 300 s. Sealants could show a significantly improved hemostasis comparing to the control group. However, hemostasis was heterogeneous among the sealant groups (liver resection: 60%-100%, spleen injury: 70%-100%). The mean blood loss decreased significantly using sealants comparing to control group (liver resection: 6-120 fold, spleen injury: 2.5-36 fold). The hemostatic time in groups that achieved complete hemostasis was different in each sealant group (liver resection: 30-166 s, spleen injury: 60-180 s). We conclude that the hemostatic efficacy of modern sealants is impressive but heterogeneous in liver resection or splenic lesion. To maximize the effectiveness of these tools, the indication of each sealant should be carefully considered in individual settings by the surgeons. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 106B: 1307-1316, 2018.