Nowshad Nader, Saghafinia Masoud, Panahi Farzad, Bolandparvaz Shahram, Tanideh Nader
Trauma Research Center ,Shiraz Medical School , Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, IR Iran.
Trauma Research Center, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, IR Iran.
Trauma Mon. 2012 Jan;16(4):188-90. doi: 10.5812/kowsar.22517464.2850. Epub 2012 Jan 15.
In modern life, the incidence of traumatic injuries increases daily. In accidents which lead to trauma, massive bleeding is the main cause of death. Nowadays, many different chemical and herbal agents are available for quick control of bleeding.
In this study, we compare the effectiveness of two different types of chemical agents for control of bleeding in an animal model.
This research was done comparing two hemostaticagents- "Chitohem" and "Quikclot". Ten healthy IR Iranian sheep were chosen and were blindly divided into two different groups. In each of the groups, one of the aforementioned agents was to be applied. First, four main limb arteries of the sheep were dissected linearly and after measuring the volume of bleeding in the first 60 seconds, the chemical agent was applied to the site of bleeding. After that, the duration of bleeding, the volume of bleeding and the secondary blood pressure were measured and compared.
There were no significant differences between the primary features of the animals in two groups (Weight, Baseline Systolic Blood Pressure and Pre-treatment Blood loss). In dependent quantities such as the volume of bleeding after the usage of chemical agents, secondary systolic blood pressure, the results were in favor of "Quick Clot" (P < 0.001 for volume of bleeding, P = 0.008 for secondary blood pressures and P < 0.001 for the necessary time for the bleeding to stop).
In this study, it seems that activity of "Quikclot" in cessation of bleeding of large arterial vessels was slightly better than "Chitohem". Due to limitations which we had in this study, further studies are necessary to show the actual differences between these agents and their side effects.
在现代生活中,创伤性损伤的发生率与日俱增。在导致创伤的事故中,大出血是主要死因。如今,有许多不同的化学和草药制剂可用于快速控制出血。
在本研究中,我们比较两种不同类型化学制剂在动物模型中控制出血的有效性。
本研究通过比较两种止血剂——“壳聚糖止血剂”和“快速凝血剂”来进行。选取10只健康的伊朗绵羊,并将它们随机分为两组。每组使用上述其中一种制剂。首先,将绵羊的四条主要肢体动脉线性切开,在测量前60秒的出血量后,将化学制剂应用于出血部位。之后,测量并比较出血持续时间、出血量和继发性血压。
两组动物的基本特征(体重、基线收缩压和治疗前失血量)之间无显著差异。在使用化学制剂后的出血量、继发性收缩压等相关变量方面,结果显示“快速凝血剂”更具优势(出血量P < 0.001,继发性血压P = 0.008,止血所需时间P < 0.001)。
在本研究中,“快速凝血剂”在大血管止血方面的活性似乎略优于“壳聚糖止血剂”。鉴于本研究存在的局限性,有必要进一步研究以明确这些制剂之间的实际差异及其副作用。