Butts C Caleb, Bose Kelly, Frotan M Amin, Hodge Juvonda, Gulati Salil
Department of Surgery, University of South Alabama, United States.
Department of Surgery, University of South Alabama, United States.
Burns. 2017 Mar;43(2):374-378. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2016.08.026. Epub 2016 Sep 19.
One of the primary intraoperative challenges during burn surgery is to adequately excise the burn while avoiding massive hemorrhage. This has become increasingly important, as we see more burn patients that are older and with more medical comorbidities. While adequate excision down to healthy tissues for deep burns is essential for skin graft to take, it also leads to active bleeding that can be a challenge to control. Good hemostasis is imperative as a hematoma is the most common cause of graft loss. Several new products have become available to help control intraoperative hemorrhage. A new hemostatic dressing, NuStat, is available and approved by FDA in United States.
A single institution prospective randomized control trial was completed at Regional Burn Center of the University of South Alabama comparing NuStat with the institutional historic standard of care. Twenty such patients were included in our study. A cost analysis was also completed as part of the study retrospectively.
For dressings used to treat the burn site, blood loss on the side treated with NuStat was on average less (27g/100cm) than the side treated with our historic standard of care (31g/100cm), though it was not statistically significant (p=0.81). Similarly, on the donor site, blood loss on the side treated with NuStat was on average less (14g/100cm) than the side treated with our historic standard of care (15g/100cm), but it was also not statistically significant (p=0.92). Average total blood loss from both excision and donor sites was also less with NuStat (10g/100cm) compared to the historic standard of care (12g/100cm), but it was also not significant (p=0.77). There was no difference in the number of cycles required to achieve hemostasis for either the burn (1.15 NuStat vs. 1.1 for historic standard of care, p=0.70) or the donor site (1 vs. 1, p=1.0). When comparing the cost of NuStat versus the historic standard of care, the actual costs incurred for the wounds was less for the portion treated with NuStat ($148.43) when compared to the historic standard of care ($186.45) (p<0.001).
Based on these findings, NuStat hemostatic action should be comparable to the historic standard of care, and these newer hemostatic agents evaluated further in burn surgery and bleeding during other procedures such as trauma surgery.
烧伤手术中主要的术中挑战之一是在避免大量出血的同时充分切除烧伤组织。随着我们看到越来越多年龄较大且合并更多内科疾病的烧伤患者,这一点变得越来越重要。虽然对于深度烧伤,彻底切除至健康组织对于皮肤移植成功至关重要,但这也会导致活动性出血,控制起来可能具有挑战性。良好的止血至关重要,因为血肿是移植失败的最常见原因。有几种新产品可用于帮助控制术中出血。一种新型止血敷料NuStat已在美国上市并获得美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)批准。
在南阿拉巴马大学区域烧伤中心完成了一项单机构前瞻性随机对照试验,将NuStat与机构历史护理标准进行比较。我们的研究纳入了20例此类患者。作为研究的一部分,还进行了回顾性成本分析。
对于用于治疗烧伤部位的敷料,使用NuStat治疗的一侧平均失血量(27克/100平方厘米)低于使用我们历史护理标准治疗的一侧(31克/100平方厘米),尽管差异无统计学意义(p = 0.81)。同样,在供皮区,使用NuStat治疗的一侧平均失血量(14克/100平方厘米)低于使用我们历史护理标准治疗的一侧(15克/100平方厘米),但差异也无统计学意义(p = 0.92)。与历史护理标准(12克/100平方厘米)相比,NuStat治疗时切除部位和供皮区的平均总失血量也较少(10克/100平方厘米),但差异也不显著(p = 0.77)。实现烧伤部位(NuStat为1.15次,历史护理标准为1.1次,p = 0.70)或供皮区止血所需的循环次数没有差异(均为1次,p = 1.0)。在比较NuStat与历史护理标准的成本时,与历史护理标准(186.45美元)相比,使用NuStat治疗部分伤口的实际成本更低(148.43美元)(p < 0.001)。
基于这些发现,NuStat的止血作用应与历史护理标准相当,这些新型止血剂应在烧伤手术以及其他手术(如创伤手术)中的出血情况中进一步评估。