Observational evaluation of outcomes and resource utilization from hemostatic matrices in spine surgery

References

• Levi M, Cromheecke ME, de Jonge E, et al. Pharmacological strategies to decrease excessive blood loss in cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of clinically relevant endpoints. Lancet 1999;354:1940-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karkouti K, Wijeysundera DN, Yau TM, et al. The independent association of massive blood loss with mortality in cardiac surgery. Transfusion 2004;44:1453-62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boucher BA, Traub O. Achieving hemostasis in the surgical field. Pharmacotherapy 2009;29:S2-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renkens KL, Payner TD, Leipzig TJ, et al. A multicenter, prospective, randomized trial evaluating a new hemostatic agent for spine surgery. Spine 2001;26:1645-50
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nuttall GA, Horlocker TT, Santrach PJ, et al. Predictors of blood transfusions in spinal instrumentation and fusion surgery. Spine 2000;25:596-601
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Triulzi DJ, Vanek K, Ryan DH, et al. A clinical and immunologic study of blood transfusion and postoperative bacterial infection in spinal surgery. Transfusion 1992;32:517-24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis KM, Atlee HD, Mannone AJ, et al. Comparison of two gelatin and thrombin combination hemostats in a porcine liver abrasion model. J Invest Surg 2013;26:141-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nasso G, Piancone F, Bonifazi R, et al. Prospective, randomized clinical trial of the Floseal matrix sealant in cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2009;88:1520-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raga F, Sanz-Cortes M, Bonilla F, et al. Reducing blood loss at myomectomy with use of a gelatin-thrombin matrix hemostatic sealant. Fert Steril 2009;92:356-60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mozet C, Prettin C, Dietze M, et al. Use of Floseal and effects on wound healing and pain in adults undergoing tonsillectomy: randomised comparison versus electro-cautery. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2012;269:2247-54
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oz MC, Cosgrove DM 3rd, Badduke BR, et al. Controlled clinical trial of a novel hemostatic agent in cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2000;69:1376-82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samudrala S. Topical hemostatic agents in surgery: a surgeon’s perspective. AORN J 2008;88:S2-11
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schreiber MA, Neveleff DJ. Achieving hemostasis with topical hemostats: making clinically and economically appropriate decisions in the surgical and trauma settings. AORN J 2011;94:S4-20
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Carless PA, Henry DA, Anthony DM. Fibrin sealant use for minimizing peri-operative allogeneic blood transfusion. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;1:CD004171
   Google Scholar
• Albala DM, Lawson JH. Recent clinical and investigational applications of fibrin sealant in selected surgical specialties. J Am Coll Surg 2005;202:685-97
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomizawa Y. Clinical benefits and risk analysis of topical hemostats: a review. J Artif Organs 2005;8:137-42
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Weaver FA, Hood DB, Zatina M, et al. Gelatin-thrombin-based hemostatic sealant for intraoperative bleeding in vascular surgery. Ann Vasc Surg 2002;16:286-93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coenye KE, Bourgain C, Keibl C, et al. A qualitative morphological comparison of two haemostatic agents in a porcine liver trauma model. Surg Sci 2013;4:359-64
   Google Scholar
• Tackett SM, Calcaterra D, Magee G, et al. Real-world outcomes of hemostatic matrices in cardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2014;28:1558-65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finn T. Premier Perspectives database: Comparative effectiveness research (CER) - Validated. 2012; http://hcmatters.com/2012/04/premier-perspectives-database-comparative-effectiveness-research-cer-validated/. Accessed May 12, 2015
   Google Scholar
• Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373-83
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zhang J, Yu KF. What's the relative risk?: a method of correcting the odds ratio in group studies of common outcomes. J Am Med Assoc 1998;280:1690-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SAS Institute Inc. SAS® 9.3 System options: reference, 2nd edn. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc, 2011
   Google Scholar
• Matin SF. Prospective randomized trial of skin adhesive versus sutures for closure of 217 laparoscopic port-site incisions. J Am Coll Surg 2003;196:845-53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bacchetta MD, Girardi LN, Southard EJ, et al. Comparison of open versus bedside percutaneous dilational tracheostomy in the cardiothoracic surgical patient: outcomes and financial analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 2005;79:1879-85
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chatterjee A1, Payette MJ, Demas CP, et al. Opportunity cost: a systematic application to surgery. Surgery 2009;146:18-22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shander A, Hofmann A, Ozawa S, et al. Activity-based costs of blood transfusions in surgical patients at four hospitals. Transfusion 2010;50:753-65
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar