BACKGROUND: Techniques for better hemorrhage control after injury could change outcome. We have previously shown that a zeolite mineral hemostatic agent (ZH) can control aggressive bleeding through adsorption of water, which is an exothermic process. Increasing the residual moisture content (RM) of ZH can theoretically decrease heat generation, but its effect on the hemostatic properties is unknown. We tested ZH with increasing RM against controls and other hemostatic agents in a swine model of battlefield injury. METHODS: A complex groin injury was created in 72 swine (37 +/- 0.8 kg). This included semitransection of the proximal thigh and complete division of the femoral artery and vein. After 3 minutes, the animals were randomized to 1 of 10 groups: group 1, no dressing (ND); group 2, standard dressing (SD); group 3, SD + 3.5 oz ZH with 1% RM (1% ZH); group 4, SD + 3.5 oz ZH with 4% RM (4% ZH); group 5, SD + 2 oz ZH with 1% RM (1% ZH 2oz); group 6, SD + 3.5 oz ZH with 8% RM (8% ZH); group 7, SD + chitosan-based hemostat, HemCon (HC); group 8, SD + 3.5 oz nonzeolite mineral hemostat, Quick Relief (NZH); group 9, SD + bovine clotting factors-based hemostat, Fast Act (FA); and group 10, SD + 30 g of starch-based hemostat, TraumaDex (TDex). Resuscitation (500 mL of Hespan over 30 minutes) was started 15 minutes after injury and hemodynamic monitoring was performed for 180 minutes. Primary endpoints were survival for 180 minutes and blood loss. In addition, maximum wound temperatures were recorded, and histologic damage to artery, vein, nerve, and muscle was documented. RESULTS: Use of 1% ZH decreased blood loss and reduced mortality to 0% (p < 0.05). Increasing the RM adversely affected efficacy without any significant decrease in wound temperatures. Minimal histologic tissue damage was seen with ZH independent of the percentage of RM. CONCLUSION: The use of zeolite hemostatic agent (1% residual moisture, 3.5 oz) can control hemorrhage and dramatically reduce mortality from a lethal groin wound.
BACKGROUND: Techniques for better hemorrhage control after injury could change outcome. We have previously shown that a zeolite mineral hemostatic agent (ZH) can control aggressive bleeding through adsorption of water, which is an exothermic process. Increasing the residual moisture content (RM) of ZH can theoretically decrease heat generation, but its effect on the hemostatic properties is unknown. We tested ZH with increasing RM against controls and other hemostatic agents in a swine model of battlefield injury. METHODS: A complex groin injury was created in 72 swine (37 +/- 0.8 kg). This included semitransection of the proximal thigh and complete division of the femoral artery and vein. After 3 minutes, the animals were randomized to 1 of 10 groups: group 1, no dressing (ND); group 2, standard dressing (SD); group 3, SD + 3.5 oz ZH with 1% RM (1% ZH); group 4, SD + 3.5 oz ZH with 4% RM (4% ZH); group 5, SD + 2 oz ZH with 1% RM (1% ZH 2oz); group 6, SD + 3.5 oz ZH with 8% RM (8% ZH); group 7, SD + chitosan-based hemostat, HemCon (HC); group 8, SD + 3.5 oz nonzeolite mineral hemostat, Quick Relief (NZH); group 9, SD + bovine clotting factors-based hemostat, Fast Act (FA); and group 10, SD + 30 g of starch-based hemostat, TraumaDex (TDex). Resuscitation (500 mL of Hespan over 30 minutes) was started 15 minutes after injury and hemodynamic monitoring was performed for 180 minutes. Primary endpoints were survival for 180 minutes and blood loss. In addition, maximum wound temperatures were recorded, and histologic damage to artery, vein, nerve, and muscle was documented. RESULTS: Use of 1% ZH decreased blood loss and reduced mortality to 0% (p < 0.05). Increasing the RM adversely affected efficacy without any significant decrease in wound temperatures. Minimal histologic tissue damage was seen with ZH independent of the percentage of RM. CONCLUSION: The use of zeolite hemostatic agent (1% residual moisture, 3.5 oz) can control hemorrhage and dramatically reduce mortality from a lethal groin wound.
Authors: Don Johnson; Sheri Bates; Sofiya Nukalo; Amy Staub; Aaron Hines; Taylor Leishman; Jennifer Michel; Dusti Sikes; Brian Gegel; James Burgert Journal: Ann Med Surg (Lond) Date: 2014-03-26
Authors: Luis Teodoro da Luz; Bartolomeu Nascimento; Homer Tien; Michael J Kim; Avery B Nathens; Savvas Vlachos; Elon Glassberg Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Todd A Ostomel; Peter K Stoimenov; Patricia A Holden; Hasan B Alam; Galen D Stucky Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Nasim Annabi; Ali Tamayol; Su Ryon Shin; Amir M Ghaemmaghami; Nicholas A Peppas; Ali Khademhosseini Journal: Nano Today Date: 2014-10-01 Impact factor: 20.722
Authors: Roberta Cassano; Maria Luisa Di Gioia; Silvia Mellace; Nevio Picci; Sonia Trombino Journal: J Mater Sci Mater Med Date: 2017-11-07 Impact factor: 3.896
Authors: DaShawn A Hickman; Christa L Pawlowski; Ujjal D S Sekhon; Joyann Marks; Anirban Sen Gupta Journal: Adv Mater Date: 2017-11-22 Impact factor: 30.849