ArticleAorta (Stamford, Conn.)2018
Evaluation of BioFoam for Anastomotic Bleeding in Cardiovascular Surgery.
Article in Aorta (Stamford, Conn.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHemostatic agents are increasingly used as an adjunct to standard methods of controlling anastomotic bleeding in surgical procedures. The purpose of this study was to investigate the safety and effectiveness of BioFoam Surgical Matrix used as an adjunct for anastomotic hemostasis following cardiovascular surgery.
methodsA prospective, multicenter, single arm study was conducted with 75 subjects treated with BioFoam following a total of 105 elective cardiovascular surgical procedures. Time to hemostasis was recorded following a single application of BioFoam in 74 subjects. Safety evaluations included intraoperative administration of a blood product, requirement for alternative means to achieve hemostasis, and the incidence of reoperation for bleeding.
resultsHemostasis within 3 minutes was achieved in 62 (84%) of the 74 subjects and within 10 minutes in 69 (93%) of these subjects. BioFoam was well tolerated. Twelve (16%) of the 75 enrolled subjects each experienced one adverse event, and 13 serious adverse events were reported in 10 (13.3%) of the subjects. None of the adverse events was considered by the Investigators to be related to BioFoam. Blood products were administered to 14 (18.6%) of the 75 subjects, banked autologous blood was given to 5 (6.6%) subjects, and 57 (75.7%) subjects required only a cell saver. Four (5.3%) of the 75 subjects required reoperation for bleeding within 24 hours of surgery. There were no observations of bleeding in any subject at discharge and no reoperation for bleeding following discharge. The mean operation time was 218.2 (±72.2) minutes.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates the effectiveness of BioFoam Surgical Matrix when used as an adjunct for anastomotic hemostasis following a broad range of cardiovascular surgical procedures. The safety outcomes were within the normal limits for the types of procedures performed.
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.