Comparison of 10 Different Hemostatic Dressings in an Aortic Injury

Abstract

With one 4-minute application, a single fibrin dressing stopped bleeding from an aortotomy, which was equivalent to sutured repair. No other test group exhibited any evidence of significant hemostatic efficacy.

An Alternative Hemostatic Dressing: Comparison of CELOX, HemCon, and QuikClot

“…To create a variety of high-pressure ⁄ high-flow and low-pressure ⁄ low-flow states, bleeding time has varied in previous studies. [6][7][8][9][10][15][16][17][18] We chose to replicate a 3-minute bleed, which has clearly been demonstrated to produce a fatal wound. 7 While we are not aware of any existing field data that document average time to intervention in the operational environment, we believe that 3 minutes of bleeding is a gross estimate of the likely delay to care encountered on the battlefield.…”

Adjuncts for Tissue stasis

“…TCH failed to demonstrate a significant difference in length of survival or blood loss compared to the negative control (gauze dressing). 10 Pusateri et al similarly studied TCH and other dressings in a grade V swine liver injury model. 30 This experiment also demonstrated a failure of the dressing to decrease blood loss when compared to standard gauze.…”

“…41 When compared to eight other dressings, including TCH and Rapid Deployment Hemostat (RDH ® ) (Marine Polymer Technologies, Danvers, MA) in a grade V liver injury model, FSD was the only dressing that significantly decreased blood loss. 30 In another study that compared FSD with nine other hemostatic dressings using a porcine aortic injury model, 10 FSD was the only treatment (other than suture repair, positive control) to significantly reduce blood loss and mortality.…”

“…When tested against severe hemorrhage in large animal models, the product has been ineffective. 10,30 Prospective, controlled, clinical studies are needed to confirm that this product can reduce transfusion requirements or otherwise improve significant outcome measures.…”

“…10,30 Sondeen et al evaluated TCH and nine other dressings in a severe arterial hemorrhage in swine. TCH failed to demonstrate a significant difference in length of survival or blood loss compared to the negative control (gauze dressing).…”