MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404941110 · doi:10.60142/ijhti.v3i02.07

Evaluation of Hemostatic Effectiveness in a Standard Swine Hemorrhage Model of Severe Bleeding: A Comparative Study of Chitosan Gauze and Kaolin Gauze

2024· article· en· W4404941110 on OpenAlexaff
Anup Kumar, Animesh Agrawal, Kala Kumar Bharani, Leo Mavely

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Health Technology and Innovation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemostasis and retained surgical items
Canadian institutionsEmergent BioSolutions (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemostatic AgentMedicineChitosanHemostaticsSurgeryHemostasisChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hemorrhage remains a critical factor contributing to avoidable fatalities in combat scenarios and civilian emergencies. Significant advancements have been made in managing extremity hemorrhage through tourniquet application, although not all injuries can be effectively treated with this method. In the United States, the Committee on Tactical Combat Casualty Care (CoTCCC) has emphasized the importance of employing hemostatic dressings during initial trauma care as an alternative when tourniquet application is not feasible. Similar recommendations have been adopted globally, highlighting the pivotal role of topical hemostats in managing such critical situations. Among the recommended topical hemostats, hemostatic gauze, composed of biomaterials including chitosan and kaolin, has demonstrated superior efficacy in rapidly achieving hemostasis. The objective of this study was to evaluate the hemostatic efficacy of axiostat gauze (AG) in an extremity arterial hemorrhage model in swine and compare it with QuikClot Combat Gauze (QCG). The femoral artery was selected to create a model of severe arterial hemorrhage. This model is widely accepted as a standardized combat injury model by military laboratories, including those of the US Department of Defense. The findings indicate that AG has a superior safety profile, evidenced by the absence of particle release, and offers advantages in terms of faster hemostasis, reduced overall blood loss, and greater fluid absorbency compared to QCG. Although AG achieved quicker hemostasis, both AG and QCG ultimately provided effective eventual hemostasis in all animals, demonstrating comparable overall efficacy. In addition to its hemostatic performance, AG also possesses antimicrobial properties and is biocompatible. These attributes make AG a highly effective option for managing severe traumatic bleeding. Thus, AG can be recommended for use in both military and civilian pre-hospital settings as a strategic solution for critical bleeding situations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Health Technology and InnovationSame topicHemostasis and retained surgical itemsFrench-language works237,207