Comparison of Purified Plant Polysaccharide (HemoStase) versus Gelatin-Thrombin Matrix (FloSeal) in Controlling Bleeding during Sinus Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Purified plant polysaccharide (HemoStase) is a plant-derived hemostatic agent that has not previously been used in sinus surgery. This study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of this novel agent in the control of nasal bleeding during endoscopic sinus surgery. The volume of bleeding during endoscopic sinus surgery was hypothesized to not be statistically significantly different between a control group (gelatin-thrombin matrix; FloSeal) and an experimental group (purified plant polysaccharide; HemoStase). METHODS: Eighteen patients with a history of chronic rhinosinusitis in whom maximal medical therapy failed who underwent endoscopic sinus surgery were randomized into one of two groups (control FloSeal group or experimental HemoStase group). In the control group, sites in the nose that were actively bleeding during the operation were controlled with FloSeal. In the experimental group, sites in the nose that were actively bleeding during the operation were controlled with HemoStase. The main outcome measure was total operative blood loss. Blood loss was the sum of blood removed by suction during the surgery (recorded in milliliters) and blood on surgical sponges (weighed and converted to milliliters). Statistical analysis was performed with the t-test and the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: The amounts of blood loss (mean +/- SEM) were not significantly different between the FloSeal (262 +/- 15 mL) and HemoStase (265 +/- 33 mL) groups (p = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate the use of a novel product for the control of intraoperative bleeding during endoscopic sinus surgery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".