ArticleUpdates in surgery2021
An international multidisciplinary peer-driven consensus on the optimal use of hemostatic powders in surgical practice.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use of polysaccharide hemostatic agent (HaemoCer™) in breast cancer surgery to reduce postoperative complications: A randomised controlled trial.International wound journal · 2023Trial
- Article
- Use of Ultra-Hydrophilic Absorbable Polysaccharide for Bleeding Control in Cardiothoracic Surgical Procedures.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Comparative analyses of the hemostatic efficacy and surgical device performance of powdered oxidized regenerated cellulose and starch-based powder formulations.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Article
- Absorbable Powder Haemostat Use in Minimally Invasive Thoracic Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- The use of Arista AH as a local haemostatic agent in distal splenopancreatectomy: report of two cases.Drugs in context · 2024Article
- Surgicel® Granuloma Mimicking Recurrent Thyroid Tumor After Thyroidectomy: A Case Report and Literature Review.Cureus · 2023Article
- Article
- Safety and Performance of Hemostatic Powders.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
- Air leak and intraoperative bleeding in thoracic surgery: a Delphi consensus among the members of Italian society of thoracic surgery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Article
- Exploring Adverse Events and Utilization of Topical Hemostatic Agents in Surgery.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bleeding is a consequence of insufficient hemostasis and excessive bleeding at a surgical site is associated with an increased risk of post-operative infection, transfusion and re-operation, in addition to increased hospital length of stay and costs. Surgeons employ a range of methods to achieve hemostasis, including topical hemostatic agents of differing composition and properties. Hemostatic powders are a sub-group of topical hemostats, which can be used in helping as adjuncts to manage troublesome bleeding in a variety of situations. As this technology is relatively new and potentially not well known by the broad surgical community, no specific guidelines or recommendations for the optimal use of hemostatic powders in surgery currently exist. A steering group throughout Europe of multidisciplinary surgeons, expert in hemostasis and hemostatics, identified from literature and from personal experience, five key topics. When to use hemostatic powder, the evidence for use, benefits of use, safety remarks and considerations in various surgical specialties. Thirty-seven statements were subsequently drawn from these five key topics. An online survey was sent to 128 high-volume surgeons working in breast surgery, gynaecological and obstetric surgery, general and emergency surgery, thoracic surgery and urological surgery in Europe to assess agreement (consensus) with these statements. Consensus was defined as high if ≥ 75% and very high if ≥ 90% of respondents agreed with a statement. A total of 79 responses were received and consensus among the surgical experts was very high in 27 (73%) statements, high in 8 (22%) statements and was not achieved in 2 (5%) statements. Based on the consensus scores, the steering group produced 16 key recommendations which they considered could improve patient outcomes by reducing post-operative bleeding and its associated complications using hemostatic powder.
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.