Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42890426›Full record

ReviewiScience2026

Recent advances in medical hemostatic materials: Mechanisms, evaluation, and clinical perspectives.

Weifan Xu, Xing Pang, Yingli Zhu, Lanying Guo, Jinsong Zhao, Pengfei Ren

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in iScience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Weifan XuSchool of Medical Imaging, Wannan Medical University, Wuhu 241002, China.
Xing PangSchool of Medical Imaging, Wannan Medical University, Wuhu 241002, China.
Yingli ZhuKey Laboratory of Systems Health Science of Zhejiang Province, School of Life Science, Hangzhou Institute for Advanced Study, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou 310024, China.
Lanying GuoSchool of Medical Imaging, Wannan Medical University, Wuhu 241002, China.
Jinsong ZhaoSchool of Medical Imaging, Wannan Medical University, Wuhu 241002, China.
Pengfei RenSchool of Medical Imaging, Wannan Medical University, Wuhu 241002, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Uncontrolled hemorrhage remains a major cause of preventable death in trauma and surgery, yet the performance of hemostatic materials varies markedly with wound geometry, blood flow, coagulation status, and tissue sensitivity. This review critically examines natural polymer-based, synthetic polymer-based, inorganic, and composite hemostats by linking material structure to six principal mechanisms: fluid absorption and surface adsorption, coagulation activation, bioactive-factor delivery, photothermal assistance, adhesive sealing, and microstructural regulation. Beyond cataloging materials, we compare class-specific advantages, failure modes, and safety constraints, and analyze how hemodilution, hypothermia, acidosis, anticoagulation, infection, and high-flow bleeding reshape material performance. We further integrate clinically used products, scenario-based material selection, and a staged evaluation framework spanning mechanistic assays, hostile-condition testing, translational bleeding models, rebleeding assessment, and post-hemostasis safety. Finally, we outline stage-matched pathways for responsive and multifunctional systems. This mechanism-scenario-evaluation framework supports more rigorous design, comparison, and clinical translation of next-generation hemostatic materials.

Indexed as

clinical translationhemostatic materialsintelligent hemostatic systemsmechanism-based design

Identifiers

PMID42890426
PMCPMC13673108

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.