↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

An in vivo comparison of the efficacy of hemostatic powders, using two porcine bleeding models

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
An in vivo comparison of the efficacy of hemostatic powders, using two porcine bleeding models
Published in
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, November 2017
DOI 10.2147/mder.s140663
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melinda H MacDonald, Allen Y Wang, Jeffrey W Clymer, Richard W Hutchinson, Richard Kocharian

Abstract

Usage of topical hemostatic agents in surgery is increasing, including use during minimally invasive procedures, and even for surgeries that have a low risk of bleeding complications. A novel product, Surgicel® Powder - Absorbable Hemostatic Powder (SP), made from oxidized regenerated cellulose (ORC) fabric, has been developed for adjunctive use in surgical procedures to assist in control of oozing bleeding over broad areas and where access could be difficult with a fabric ORC product. This study compares the new SP to other commercially available hemostatic powder products in two in vivo models. Hemostatic efficacy of SP was compared to two polysaccharide-based hemostats in a porcine liver punch biopsy model and to three polysaccharide-based hemostats and one non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostat in a porcine liver abrasion model. Primary outcomes measured were hemostatic efficacy, defined as hemostasis within 10 minutes of application, and time-to-hemostasis (TTH). In the punch biopsy model, SP displayed significantly higher effective hemostasis rates than one of the polysaccharide hemostats (p=0.047) and faster TTH than both (p<0.001). In the liver abrasion model, SP had significantly higher effective hemostasis rates (p≤0.002) and faster TTH (p<0.001) than the other four hemostatic agents. The amount of powder applied within the ranges used did not appear to affect hemostatic efficacy. In both the liver punch biopsy model of mild to moderate bleeding and the liver abrasion model of mild but diffuse oozing, SP provided more effective hemostasis and faster TTH than other marketed hemostatic powders. The results from this in vivo study suggest that Surgicel Powder may be useful in clinical applications where control of oozing capillary, mild venous, and small arterial hemorrhage is required including bleeding in difficult-to-access locations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Master 4 14%
Researcher 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 11 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 29%
Engineering 4 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Materials Science 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 11 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2017.
All research outputs
#22,834,739
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#287
of 314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#299,573
of 341,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,042 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.