2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2021.04.035
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Single Versus Double Anatomic Site Intraosseous Blood Transfusion in a Swine Model of Hemorrhagic Shock

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Using a pressure bag significantly increased administration speed, which was not inferior to that of IV access. The infusion flow rates associated with pressure bag use in IO administration are known to range from 30 to 70 mL/min, and our study reflects these results [32][33][34]. Increasing the pressure during blood transfusion can increase the possibility of hemolysis, indicating a need for further research into the safety of blood administration [34][35][36][37].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 61%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Using a pressure bag significantly increased administration speed, which was not inferior to that of IV access. The infusion flow rates associated with pressure bag use in IO administration are known to range from 30 to 70 mL/min, and our study reflects these results [32][33][34]. Increasing the pressure during blood transfusion can increase the possibility of hemolysis, indicating a need for further research into the safety of blood administration [34][35][36][37].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 61%
“…Furthermore, this study lacks a description of the size, location, and number of IV (peripheral or central) lines to which IO access is compared. Finally, it has been reported that infusion via one anatomical site versus simultaneous infusion via two sites can produce a difference in speed [32]. After excluding patients in the IO group who were also administered IV, a comparison between the IO-only and IV groups should have been performed; however, this was not feasible because of the small number of patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cadaveric swine ( Sus scrofa ) in the 70‒90 kg range were selected because their proximal humerus bone density (>1 g/cm 2 ) approximates that of an average 20‒40‐year‐old male trauma patient. 11 , 26 , 27 , 28 We utilized recently euthanized cadaveric swine samples to foster the “Refine, Reduce, Reuse” principle of animal research 29 , 30 and because cadaveric swine models have demonstrated great utility in previous investigations of IO infusion. 31 , 32 In this translational model, we chose one long bone (proximal humerus) and one non‐load‐bearing bone (sternum) to test the relationship between catheter tip location, flow rates, and infusion pressure.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite this limitation, pressure measurements were consistent with infusion parameters from prior in vivo IO studies and allowed for comparative assessments. 11 , 28 , 39 , 40 Furthermore, previous animal studies have demonstrated that IO hydrostatic pressure is proportional to arterial pressure. 41 This is important, because the present study was designed to contrast flow and pressure relative to zones of catheter tip placement, not to acquire absolute flow and pressure values, which somewhat ameliorates the limitations of using a cadaveric model rather than a pressurized in vivo model.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation