3.9 Article

Comparison of regenerated and non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostatic agents

Journal

EUROPEAN SURGERY-ACTA CHIRURGICA AUSTRIACA
Volume 45, Issue 4, Pages 213-220

Publisher

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s10353-013-0222-z

Keywords

Traumastem; Surgicel; Cellulose; Oxidized cellulose; Hemostasis; Liver abrasion; Liver square; Celstat; Fibrin pad

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Oxidized cellulose is a well known and widely used surgical hemostat. It is available in many forms, but manufactured using either a nonregenerated or regenerated process. This study compares the fiber structure, pH in solution, bactericidal effectiveness, and hemostatic effectiveness of an oxidized nonregenerated cellulose (ONRC; Traumastem(A (R))) and an oxidized regenerated cellulose (ORC; Surgicel(A (R)) Original). In vitro, fiber structures were compared using scanning electron microscopy, pH of phosphate buffer solution (PBS) and human plasma were measured after each cellulose was submerged, and bactericidal effect was measured by plating each cellulose with four bacteria. In vivo, time to hemostasis and hemostatic success were compared using a general surgery nonheparinized porcine liver abrasion model and a peripheral vascular surgery heparinized leporine femoral vessel bleeding model. Ultrastructure of ONRC fiber is frayed, while ORC is smooth. ORC pH is statistically more acidic than ONRC in PBS, but equal in plasma. No difference in bactericidal effectiveness was observed. In vivo, ONRC provided superior time to hemostasis relative to ORC (211.2 vs 384.6 s, N = 60/group) in the general surgery model; and superior hemostatic success relative to ORC at 30 (60 vs. 15 %; OR: 13.5; 95 % CI: 3.72-49.1, N = 40/group), 60 (85 vs. 37.5 %; OR: 12.3; 95 % CI: 3.66-41.6), and 90 s (97.5 vs 70.0 %; OR: 21.1, 95 % CI: 2.28-195.9) in the peripheral vascular model. ONRC provides superior hemostasis and equivalent bactericidal effectiveness relative to ORC, which is likely due to its fiber structure than acidity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available