Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35299991›Full record

ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2022

Real-World Clinical and Economic Outcomes Associated with Surgiflo

Walter Danker, Jyoti Aggarwal, Sneha S Kelkar, Xiaocong L Marston, Xin Gao, Stephen S Johnston

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Glioma Cell Membrane-Coated CaCOInternational journal of nanomedicine · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Walter DankerEthicon Inc., Somerville, NJ, USA.
Jyoti AggarwalOPEN Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6664-0068
Sneha S KelkarOPEN Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Xiaocong L MarstonOPEN Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Xin GaoOPEN Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Stephen S JohnstonJohnson & Johnson Co., New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Open Health Systems Laboratory · USJohnson & Johnson (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Topical hemostatic agents are an option for controlling bleeding during cardiovascular surgery. Previous studies comparing topical hemostatic agents in cardiovascular surgery predate the 2012 reformulation of Surgiflo Objective: To compare clinical and economic outcomes in patients receiving the current formulation of Surgiflo vs Floseal during cardiovascular surgeries. Methodology: A retrospective analysis was conducted using the Premier Healthcare Database. Eligible patients had an inpatient cardiovascular surgery between 1/1/2013 and 6/1/2018, were ≥18 years old and received the current formulation of Surgiflo or Floseal during surgery. Propensity score matching was performed, with exact matching on the surgery year and surgery type (aortic, coronary artery bypass grafting, valve, or other). Descriptive analysis and generalized estimating equations models compared outcomes between the Surgiflo and Floseal groups. Results: The matched sample included 5768 patients in each group (mean age: 66.5 years; 66.3% male). In the matched sample, rates of any documented bleeding event were similar in Surgiflo and Floseal groups (6.9% vs 7.2%; P = 0.576). Differences in transfusion rates between patients receiving Surgiflo vs Floseal varied by operational definition and timing of measurement but did not differ by >2 percentage points. Compared to Floseal, patients who received Surgiflo experienced longer surgery duration (306.0 vs 299.4 minutes), lower hospitalization cost ($44,146 vs $46,812), and lower odds of readmission at 30, 60, and 90 days post-discharge (all P < 0.05). Inpatient mortality and LOS were comparable between Surgiflo and Floseal (all P > 0.05). Conclusion: In this large study of real-world clinical and economic outcomes after cardiovascular surgery involving the current formulation of Surgiflo vs Floseal, Surgiflo was associated with mostly similar clinical outcomes as compared with Floseal. Differences in selected economic/resource use outcomes were also observed, for which root-cause analysis in future research would be informative.

Indexed as

bleedingcardiovascular surgeryeconomic outcomesFlosealSurgiflo®transfusion

Identifiers

PMID35299991
PMCPMC8922341
OpenAlexW4221088873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.