Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock
Home About us Editors Ahead of Print Current Issue Archives Search Instructions Subscribe Advertise Login 
Users online:2410   Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size   
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2011  |  Volume : 4  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 207-211

The effects of blood pressure on rebleeding when using ExcelArrest™ in a porcine model of lethal femoral injury


1 William Beaumont Army Medical Center, Ft Bliss, El Paso, TX, USA
2 Tripler Army Medical Center, Honolulu, HI, USA
3 FT Sam Houston, San Antonio, TX, USA

Correspondence Address:
Joseph O'Sullivan
FT Sam Houston, San Antonio, TX
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0974-2700.82207

Rights and Permissions

Background : Uncontrolled hemorrhage is one of the leading causes of death in both combat and civilian trauma. This study was designed to compare the arterial blood pressures at which rebleeding occurred when a hemostatic agent, ExcelArrest™, was used compared with a standard pressure dressing. Materials and Methods : This study was a prospective, experimental, and mixed research design. Swine were assigned to one of two groups: ExcelArrest™ (n=5) or a control consisting of standard pressure dressings (n=5). Investigators generated a complex groin injury. The femoral artery and vein were transected and allowed to bleed for 60 s in each pig. After 60 s, ExcelArrest™ was poured into the wound. The control group underwent the same procedures, but without treatment with the hemostatic agent. After 5 min of direct pressure, a standard pressure dressing was applied. After 30 min, dressings were removed and the systolic blood pressure (SBP) was increased incrementally using intravenous phenylephrine until rebleeding occurred. Statistical Analysis : A multivariate ANOVA and a least significant difference were used to analyze the data. Results : ExcelArrest™ was more effective in preventing rebleeding compared to a standard pressure dressing (P<0.05). The means and standard deviations in mmHg for SBP and mean arterial pressure (MAP) for rebleeding were as follows: ExcelArrest™ (SBP=206.4, SD±11.6; MAP=171.4, SD±12.5); for the control group (SBP=89.40±3.58, MAP=58.60±12.86). Conclusions : ExcelArrest™ was more effective in preventing rebleeding compared to the standard dressing with elevated blood pressures. There may be protective benefits in using this hemostatic agent against elevated blood pressures provided by ExcelArrest™.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1863    
    Printed158    
    Emailed1    
    PDF Downloaded11    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 3    

Recommend this journal