Archives of surgery (Chicago, Ill. : 1960) · 1995
Evaluation of a new hemostatic agent in experimental splenic laceration.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Horton J W, Garcia N M, Stone K R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of several hemostatic agents and to evaluate a new hemostatic agent (ReClot) in controlling splenic hemorrhage.
DESIGN: Rabbits were anesthetized and catheters placed. A celiotomy was performed and a splenic injury produced; hemostatic agent and compression were applied.
EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS: In group 1 (n = 8), the splenic laceration was compressed with a dry sponge and 75 g of pressure until hemorrhage ceased. In groups 2, 3, and 4 (n = 10 each), splenic injury was treated with Avitene, Collastat, and ReClot, respectively. Hemostatic agent was applied to the splenic laceration and a dry sponge and pressure were applied as described for group 1. In group 5 (n = 9), a splenic laceration was produced, ReClot applied, and aggressive fluid resuscitation was initiated; the volume of crystalloid was adjusted to maintain mean arterial pressure.
RESULTS: Application of a hemostatic agent reduced total blood loss compared with that measured in the control group, but there was no difference in blood loss among experimental groups treated with a hemostatic agent. The time required to achieve control of blood loss was less in the ReClot-treated group compared with the Avitene- and Collastat-treated groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The hemostatic agent ReClot had a significant advantage over other hemostatic agents for the time required to achieve control of splenic bleeding. Aggressive fluid resuscitation did not limit the ability of ReClot to produce hemostasis.
DESIGN: Rabbits were anesthetized and catheters placed. A celiotomy was performed and a splenic injury produced; hemostatic agent and compression were applied.
EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS: In group 1 (n = 8), the splenic laceration was compressed with a dry sponge and 75 g of pressure until hemorrhage ceased. In groups 2, 3, and 4 (n = 10 each), splenic injury was treated with Avitene, Collastat, and ReClot, respectively. Hemostatic agent was applied to the splenic laceration and a dry sponge and pressure were applied as described for group 1. In group 5 (n = 9), a splenic laceration was produced, ReClot applied, and aggressive fluid resuscitation was initiated; the volume of crystalloid was adjusted to maintain mean arterial pressure.
RESULTS: Application of a hemostatic agent reduced total blood loss compared with that measured in the control group, but there was no difference in blood loss among experimental groups treated with a hemostatic agent. The time required to achieve control of blood loss was less in the ReClot-treated group compared with the Avitene- and Collastat-treated groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The hemostatic agent ReClot had a significant advantage over other hemostatic agents for the time required to achieve control of splenic bleeding. Aggressive fluid resuscitation did not limit the ability of ReClot to produce hemostasis.