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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lewis, K. M., Spazierer, D., Urban, M. D., Lin, L., Redl, H., Goppelt, A.
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