Cargando…
Comparison of regenerated and non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostatic agents
BACKGROUND: 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. OBJECTIVE: This study compares the fiber structure, pH in solution, bactericidal effectiveness, and hemostatic effec...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Vienna
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3739866/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23950762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10353-013-0222-z |
_version_ | 1782476965581684736 |
---|---|
author | Lewis, K. M. Spazierer, D. Urban, M. D. Lin, L. Redl, H. Goppelt, A. |
author_facet | Lewis, K. M. Spazierer, D. Urban, M. D. Lin, L. Redl, H. Goppelt, A. |
author_sort | Lewis, K. M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: 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. OBJECTIVE: This study compares the fiber structure, pH in solution, bactericidal effectiveness, and hemostatic effectiveness of an oxidized nonregenerated cellulose (ONRC; Traumastem(®)) and an oxidized regenerated cellulose (ORC; Surgicel(®) Original). METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: ONRC provides superior hemostasis and equivalent bactericidal effectiveness relative to ORC, which is likely due to its fiber structure than acidity. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3739866 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Springer Vienna |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-37398662013-08-13 Comparison of regenerated and non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostatic agents Lewis, K. M. Spazierer, D. Urban, M. D. Lin, L. Redl, H. Goppelt, A. Eur Surg Original Article BACKGROUND: 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. OBJECTIVE: This study compares the fiber structure, pH in solution, bactericidal effectiveness, and hemostatic effectiveness of an oxidized nonregenerated cellulose (ONRC; Traumastem(®)) and an oxidized regenerated cellulose (ORC; Surgicel(®) Original). METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: ONRC provides superior hemostasis and equivalent bactericidal effectiveness relative to ORC, which is likely due to its fiber structure than acidity. Springer Vienna 2013-07-04 2013 /pmc/articles/PMC3739866/ /pubmed/23950762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10353-013-0222-z Text en © The Author(s) 2013 |
spellingShingle | Original Article Lewis, K. M. Spazierer, D. Urban, M. D. Lin, L. Redl, H. Goppelt, A. Comparison of regenerated and non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostatic agents |
title | Comparison of regenerated and non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostatic agents |
title_full | Comparison of regenerated and non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostatic agents |
title_fullStr | Comparison of regenerated and non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostatic agents |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of regenerated and non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostatic agents |
title_short | Comparison of regenerated and non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostatic agents |
title_sort | comparison of regenerated and non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostatic agents |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3739866/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23950762 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10353-013-0222-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lewiskm comparisonofregeneratedandnonregeneratedoxidizedcellulosehemostaticagents AT spaziererd comparisonofregeneratedandnonregeneratedoxidizedcellulosehemostaticagents AT urbanmd comparisonofregeneratedandnonregeneratedoxidizedcellulosehemostaticagents AT linl comparisonofregeneratedandnonregeneratedoxidizedcellulosehemostaticagents AT redlh comparisonofregeneratedandnonregeneratedoxidizedcellulosehemostaticagents AT goppelta comparisonofregeneratedandnonregeneratedoxidizedcellulosehemostaticagents |