Comparison of regenerated and non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostatic agents.

IF 0.6 4区 医学 Q4 SURGERY
K M Lewis, D Spazierer, M D Urban, L Lin, H Redl, A Goppelt
{"title":"Comparison of regenerated and non-regenerated oxidized cellulose hemostatic agents.","authors":"K M Lewis,&nbsp;D Spazierer,&nbsp;M D Urban,&nbsp;L Lin,&nbsp;H Redl,&nbsp;A Goppelt","doi":"10.1007/s10353-013-0222-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study compares the fiber structure, pH in solution, bactericidal effectiveness, and hemostatic effectiveness of an oxidized nonregenerated cellulose (ONRC; Traumastem<sup>®</sup>) and an oxidized regenerated cellulose (ORC; Surgicel<sup>®</sup> Original).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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, <i>N</i> = 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, <i>N</i> = 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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ONRC provides superior hemostasis and equivalent bactericidal effectiveness relative to ORC, which is likely due to its fiber structure than acidity.</p>","PeriodicalId":50475,"journal":{"name":"European Surgery-Acta Chirurgica Austriaca","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10353-013-0222-z","citationCount":"100","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Surgery-Acta Chirurgica Austriaca","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10353-013-0222-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/7/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 100

Abstract

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.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

再生与非再生氧化纤维素止血剂的比较。
背景:氧化纤维素是一种众所周知且广泛使用的外科止血剂。它有多种形式,但生产过程中要么采用非再生工艺,要么采用再生工艺。目的:本研究比较了一种氧化非再生纤维素(ONRC;创伤系统®)和氧化再生纤维素(ORC;原来Surgicel®)。方法:在体外用扫描电镜比较纤维结构,测定每个纤维素浸没后的磷酸缓冲液(PBS)和人血浆的pH值,并在每个纤维素上镀4个细菌,测定其杀菌效果。在体内,采用普通手术非肝素化猪肝磨损模型和周围血管手术肝素化股静脉出血模型比较止血时间和止血成功率。结果:ONRC纤维的超微结构有磨损,ORC纤维的超微结构光滑。在PBS中,ORC的pH值比ONRC的酸性更强,但在血浆中是相等的。在杀菌效果上没有观察到差异。在体内,在普通外科模型中,ONRC相对于ORC提供了更长的止血时间(211.2 vs 384.6 s, N = 60/组);与ORC相比,30的止血成功率更高(60% vs 15%;OR: 13.5;95%置信区间:3.72—-49.1,N = 40 /组),60岁(37.5% vs 85;OR: 12.3;95% CI: 3.66-41.6), 90 s (97.5% vs 70.0%;OR: 21.1, 95% CI: 2.28-195.9)。结论:与ORC相比,ONRC具有更好的止血效果和同等的杀菌效果,这可能是由于其纤维结构而非酸性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal European Surgery – Acta Chirurgica Austriaca focuses on general surgery, endocrine surgery, thoracic surgery, heart and vascular surgery. Special features include new surgical and endoscopic techniques such as minimally invasive surgery, robot surgery, and advances in surgery-related biotechnology and surgical oncology. The journal especially addresses benign and malignant esophageal diseases, i.e. achalasia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, Barrett’s esophagus, and esophageal adenocarcinoma. In keeping with modern healthcare requirements, the journal’s scope includes inter- and multidisciplinary disease management (diagnosis, therapy and surveillance).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信