Bleeding is a consequence of insufficient hemostasis and excessive bleeding at a surgical site is associated with an increased risk of post-operative infection, transfusion and re-operation, in addition to increased hospital length of stay and costs. Surgeons employ a range of methods to achieve hemostasis, including topical hemostatic agents of differing composition and properties. Hemostatic powders are a sub-group of topical hemostats, which can be used in helping as adjuncts to manage troublesome bleeding in a variety of situations. As this technology is relatively new and potentially not well known by the broad surgical community, no specific guidelines or recommendations for the optimal use of hemostatic powders in surgery currently exist. A steering group throughout Europe of multidisciplinary surgeons, expert in hemostasis and hemostatics, identified from literature and from personal experience, five key topics. When to use hemostatic powder, the evidence for use, benefits of use, safety remarks and considerations in various surgical specialties. Thirty-seven statements were subsequently drawn from these five key topics. An online survey was sent to 128 high-volume surgeons working in breast surgery, gynaecological and obstetric surgery, general and emergency surgery, thoracic surgery and urological surgery in Europe to assess agreement (consensus) with these statements. Consensus was defined as high if ≥ 75% and very high if ≥ 90% of respondents agreed with a statement. A total of 79 responses were received and consensus among the surgical experts was very high in 27 (73%) statements, high in 8 (22%) statements and was not achieved in 2 (5%) statements. Based on the consensus scores, the steering group produced 16 key recommendations which they considered could improve patient outcomes by reducing post-operative bleeding and its associated complications using hemostatic powder.

We performed systematic reviews addressing predefined clinical questions to develop recommendations with the GRADE approach regarding management of patients with overt upper gastrointestinal bleeding. We suggest risk assessment in the emergency department to identify very-low-risk patients (e.g., Glasgow-Blatchford score = 0-1) who may be discharged with outpatient follow-up. For patients hospitalized with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, we suggest red blood cell transfusion at a threshold of 7 g/dL. Erythromycin infusion is suggested before endoscopy, and endoscopy is suggested within 24 hours after presentation. Endoscopic therapy is recommended for ulcers with active spurting or oozing and for nonbleeding visible vessels. Endoscopic therapy with bipolar electrocoagulation, heater probe, and absolute ethanol injection is recommended, and low- to very-low-quality evidence also supports clips, argon plasma coagulation, and soft monopolar electrocoagulation; hemostatic powder spray TC-325 is suggested for actively bleeding ulcers and over-the-scope clips for recurrent ulcer bleeding after previous successful hemostasis. After endoscopic hemostasis, high-dose proton pump inhibitor therapy is recommended continuously or intermittently for 3 days, followed by twice-daily oral proton pump inhibitor for the first 2 weeks of therapy after endoscopy. Repeat endoscopy is suggested for recurrent bleeding, and if endoscopic therapy fails, transcatheter embolization is suggested.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

In 2013, the GIHP published guidelines for the management of severe haemorrhages and emergency surgery. This update applies to patients treated with dabigatran, with a bleeding complication or undergoing an urgent invasive procedure. It includes how to handle the available specific antidote (idarucizumab), when to measure dabigatran plasmatic concentration and when to use non-specific measures in these situations. It also includes guidelines on how to perform regional anaesthesia and analgesia procedures.

METHODS: Cross-sectional, modified Delphi approach.
OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to identify patients at risk of increased perioperative blood loss according to the opinion of expert spine surgeons across Canada. The secondary objective was to obtain information about the experts\' approach on how to minimize significant blood loss perioperatively.
BACKGROUND: Significant blood loss in major spinal surgeries has been associated with increased intra- and perioperative complications and costs. The current available evidence regarding risk factors and preventive measures for increased blood loss remains incomplete.
METHODS: A modified Delphi approach was employed to generate consensus opinion on the risk factors and preventive measures for significant blood loss in major spinal surgeries. Twenty-five spine surgeons in Canada participated in this study.
RESULTS: Among various factors, surgery for the treatment of spine tumors and prolonged operative time of greater than 5 hours were found to be the most important predictive factors for blood loss in spine surgery. On the other hand, appropriate surgical hemostasis was considered the most effective measure for the prevention of blood loss in these surgeries.
CONCLUSIONS: We recommend the reduction of blood loss by means of meticulous hemostasis and shorter operative time when it is safe and possible. This might result in better treatment outcomes. It would also lead to a reduction in costs associated with major spine surgeries and would ultimately lead to greater value-based spine care.
METHODS: 4.

The continuing evolution of technique and devices used in laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has allowed successful application of this minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of liver disease. However, the type of instruments by energy sources and technique used vary among each institution. We reviewed the literature to seek the best technique for parenchymal transection, which was proposed as one of the important clinical question in the 2nd International Consensus Conference on LLR held on October 2014. While publications have described transection techniques used in LLR from 1991 to June 2014, it is difficult to specify the best technique and device for laparoscopic hepatic parenchymal transection, owing to a lack of randomized trials with only a small number of comparative studies. However, it is clear that instruments should be used in combination with others based on their functions and the depth of liver resection. Most authors have reported using staplers to secure and divide major vessels. Preparation for prevention of unexpected hemorrhaging particularly in liver cirrhosis, the Pringle\'s maneuver and prompt technique for hemostasis should be performed. We conclude that hepatobiliary surgeons should select techniques based on their familiarity with a concrete understanding of instruments and individualize to the procedure of LLR.

A growing number of publications have described the efficacy and safety of FEIBA as a first-line haemostatic agent for surgical procedures in haemophilia A patients with high-responding FVIII inhibitors. The aim of this study was to provide practical guidance on patient management and selection and also to communicate a standardized approach to the dosing and monitoring of FEIBA during and after surgery. A consensus group was convened with the aims of (i) providing an overview of the efficacy and safety of FEIBA in surgery; (ii) sharing best practice; (iii) developing recommendations based on the outcome of (i) and (ii). To date there have been 17 publications reporting on the use of FEIBA in over 210 major and minor orthopaedic and non-orthopaedic surgical procedures. Haemostatic outcome was rated as \'excellent\' or \'good\' in 78-100% of major cases. The reporting of thromboembolic complications or anamnestic response to FEIBA was very rare. Key to the success of FEIBA as haemostatic cover in surgery is to utilize the preplanning phase to prepare the patient both for surgery and also for rehabilitation. Haemostatic control with FEIBA should be continued for an adequate period postoperatively to support wound healing and to cover what can in some patients be an extended period of physiotherapy. Published data have demonstrated that FEIBA can provide adequate, well tolerated, peri and postoperative haemostatic cover for a variety of major and minor surgical procedures in patients with haemophilia A. The consensus recommendations provide a standardized approach to the dosing and monitoring of FEIBA.

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhage from pelvic fracture is common in victims of blunt traumatic injury. In 2001, the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) published practice management guidelines for the management of hemorrhage in pelvic trauma. Since that time there have been new practice patterns and larger experiences with older techniques. The Practice Guidelines Committee of EAST decided to replace the 2001 guidelines with an updated guideline and systematic review reflecting current practice.
METHODS: Building on the previous systematic literature review in the 2001 EAST guidelines, a systematic literature review was performed to include references from 1999 to 2010. Prospective and retrospective studies were included. Reviews and case reports were excluded. Of the 1,432 articles identified, 50 were selected as meeting criteria. Nine Trauma Surgeons, an Interventional Radiologist, and an Orthopedic Surgeon reviewed the articles. The EAST primer was used to grade the evidence.
RESULTS: Six questions regarding hemorrhage from pelvic fracture were addressed: (1) Which patients with hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures warrant early external mechanical stabilization? (2) Which patients require emergent angiography? (3) What is the best test to exclude extrapelvic bleeding? (4) Are there radiologic findings which predict hemorrhage? (5) What is the role of noninvasive temporary external fixation devices? and (6) Which patients warrant preperitoneal packing?
CONCLUSIONS: Hemorrhage due to pelvic fracture remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the trauma patient. Strong recommendations were made regarding questions 1 to 4. Further study is needed to answer questions 5 and 6.

暂无摘要。