ArticlePloS one2025
A goat experimental epistaxis model: Hemostatic effect of stop nosebleeds device.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To stop epistaxis, a Saudi medical invention called "Stop Nosebleeds" with a patent was created. It is a silicone-based, adjustable device that is applied externally to the bridge of the nose and speeds up clotting by decreasing the temperature and the compressing effect of the device on the nose This study aims to examine the efficacy of the device in attaining hemostasis in goats with anterior nasal bleeding. An animal experimental nasal-bleeding model was conducted on ten goats in collaboration between King Fahad Medical City and King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The left nostril was used as interventional wounds and the right nostril was used as control. Control wounds were treated with manual compression for 20 minutes. Interventional wounds were treated with the Stop Nosebleeds device. The second group of animals was heparinized and 2 wounds were created in each animal, one of which was being treated with the Stop Nosebleeds device, while the other was being treated with manual compression. The mean bleeding duration in the experimental group (both heparinized and non-heparinized goats) was 45.5 seconds (SD = 8.2), compared to 206.0 seconds (SD = 75.7) in the control group (U = 0.00, p < 0.001). The device stopped bleeding in 52.0 seconds and 39.0 seconds in the heparinized and non-heparinized experimental groups. While, the manual compression of epistaxis stopped bleeding in 252.5 seconds (SD = 84.7) and 159.2 seconds (SD = 15.7) in the heparinized and non-heparinized control groups, respectively. The device shows promise for clinical application, however, further research with larger sample sizes and human clinical trials are needed to validate its efficacy and safety. Additionally, the use of a goat model presents limitations in directly translating these results to human clinical practice, and these differences should be careful.
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.