ReviewTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2015
Hemostatic powder spray: a new method for managing gastrointestinal bleeding.
Review in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of cyanoacrylate in the prevention of delayed bleeding after endoscopic mucosal resection of large colorectal polyps: a pilot study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2020Trial
- CEGP-003 Spray Has a Similar Hemostatic Effect to Epinephrine Injection in Cases of Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2018Trial
- Hemostatic effect of topical hemocoagulase spray in digestive endoscopy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Trial
- Precise and optimal delivery techniques of hemostatic powders in gastrointestinal bleeding.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Review
- In Situ Photoactivated Hydrogel Adhesive Dressings for Post Colon Polypectomies (PolypCures).bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Cohort of 364 Cases, Historical Comparison, and Updated Management Algorithm.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Turn over the new leaf of the treatment in peptic ulcer bleeding: a review of the literature.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2024Review
- DDS Perspective: If Gastroenterology Were a Dog, Would Endoscopy Be Its Tail? Has Therapeutic GI Endoscopy Learned to Wag the Dog?Digestive diseases and sciences · 2023Article
- Hemostatic Effect and Mechanism of Epidermal Growth Factor-Hemostatic Powder after Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in a Porcine Model.Gut and liver · 2023Article
- Propensity score matching analysis to evaluate efficacy of polyethylene oxide adhesive on preventing delayed bleeding after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Comparison of PuraStat self-assembling peptide hydrogel versus mineral-based Hemospray for endoscopic hemostasis of upper and lower gastrointestinal lesions in pigs.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Diagnosis and Management of Non-Variceal Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage: A Review of Current Guidelines and Future Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- UEG Week 2019 Poster Presentations.United European gastroenterology journal · 2019Article
- [Treatment of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: endoluminal-endovascular-surgical].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2019Review
- Efficacy of a novel endoscopically deliverable muco-adhesive hemostatic powder in an acute gastric bleeding porcine model.PloS one · 2019Article
- Hemostatic Spray for the Management of Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2019Article
- Recent advances in the management of peptic ulcer bleeding.F1000Research · 2017Review
- Early clinical experience of the safety and efficacy of EndoClot in the management of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.Endoscopy international open · 2015Article
- [Neoadjuvant therapy for tumors of the upper gastrointestinal tract : Complication management].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2015Review
- Efficacy of Hemospray in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gastrointestinal bleeding is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. The management of gastrointestinal bleeding is often challenging, depending on its location and severity. To date, widely accepted hemostatic treatment options include injection of epinephrine and tissue adhesives such as cyanoacrylate, ablative therapy with contact modalities such as thermal coagulation with heater probe and bipolar hemostatic forceps, noncontact modalities such as photodynamic therapy and argon plasma coagulation, and mechanical hemostasis with band ligation, endoscopic hemoclips, and over-the-scope clips. These approaches, albeit effective in achieving hemostasis, are associated with a 5-10% rebleeding risk. New simple, effective, universal, and safe methods are needed to address some of the challenges posed by the current endoscopic hemostatic techniques. The use of a novel hemostatic powder spray appears to be effective and safe in controlling upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Although initial reports of hemostatic powder spray as an innovative approach to manage gastrointestinal bleeding are promising, further studies are needed to support and confirm its efficacy and safety. The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility, clinical efficacy, and safety of hemostatic powder spray (Hemospray, Cook Medical, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA) as a new method for managing gastrointestinal bleeding. In this review article, we performed an extensive literature search summarizing case reports and case series of Hemospray for the management of gastrointestinal bleeding. Indications, features, technique, deployment, success rate, complications, and limitations are discussed. The combined technical and clinical success rate of Hemospray was 88.5% (207/234) among the human subjects and 81.8% (9/11) among the porcine models studied. Rebleeding occurred within 72 hours post-treatment in 38 patients (38/234; 16.2%) and in three porcine models (3/11; 27.3%). No procedure-related adverse events were associated with the use of Hemospray. Hemospray appears to be a safe and effective approach in the management of gastrointestinal bleeding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.