Hemostatic efficacy of latest-generation fibrin sealant after hepatic resection: a randomized controlled clinical study

Fibrin-based haemostatic agents for reducing blood loss in adult liver resection

BACKGROUND

Liver resection is the optimal treatment for selected benign and malignant liver tumours, but it can be associated with significant blood loss. Numerous anaesthetic and surgical techniques have been developed to reduce blood loss and improve perioperative outcomes. One such technique is the application of topical fibrin-based haemostatic agents (FBHAs) to the resection surface. There is no standard practice for FBHA use, and a variety of commercial agents and devices are available, as well as non-FBHAs (e.g. collagen-based agents). The literature is inconclusive on the effectiveness of these methods and on the clinical benefits of their routine use.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of fibrin-based haemostatic agents in reducing intraoperative blood loss in adults undergoing liver resection.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group (CHBG) Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science up to 20 January 2023. We also searched online trial registries, checked the reference lists of all primary studies, and contacted the authors of included trials for additional published or unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered for inclusion all randomised clinical trials evaluating FBHAs versus no topical intervention or non-FBHAs, irrespective of publication type, publication status, language of publication, and outcomes reported. Eligible participants could have any liver pathology and be undergoing major or minor liver resections through open or laparoscopic surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the results of the literature search and used data extraction forms to collate the results. We expressed dichotomous outcome results as risk ratios (RRs) and continuous outcome results as mean differences (MDs), each with their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We used a random-effects model for the main analyses. Our primary outcomes were perioperative mortality, serious adverse events, haemostatic efficacy, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were efficacy as sealant, adverse events considered non-serious, operating time, and length of hospital stay. We assessed the certainty of the evidence with GRADE and presented results in two summary of findings tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 trials (2945 participants) evaluating FBHAs versus no intervention or non-FBHAs; 19 trials with 2642 participants provided data for the meta-analyses. Twelve trials reported commercial funding, one trial reported no financial support, and nine trials provided no information on funding. Below we present the most clinically relevant outcome results, also displayed in our summary of findings table. Fibrin-based haemostatic agents versus no intervention Six trials (1001 participants) compared FBHAs with no intervention. One trial was at low risk of bias in all five domains, and all other trials were at high or unclear risk of bias in at least one domain. Two trials were at high risk of bias related to blinding. It is unclear if FBHAs compared with no intervention have an effect on perioperative mortality (RR 2.58, 95% CI 0.89 to 7.44; 4 trials, 782 participants), serious adverse events (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.05; 4 trials, 782 participants), postoperative transfusion (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.40; 5 trials, 864 participants), reoperation (RR 2.92, 95% CI 0.58 to 14.61; 2 trials, 612 participants), or postoperative bile leak (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.48; 4 trials, 782 participants), as the certainty of evidence was very low for all these outcomes. Fibrin-based haemostatic agents versus non-fibrin-based haemostatic agents Sixteen trials (1944 participants) compared FBHAs with non-FBHAs. All trials had at least one domain at high or unclear risk of bias. Twelve trials were at high risk of bias related to blinding. It is unclear if FBHAs compared with non-FBHAs have an effect on perioperative mortality (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.72; 11 trials, 1436 participants), postoperative transfusion (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.25; 7 trials, 599 participants), reoperation (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.90; 3 trials, 358 participants), or postoperative bile leak (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.21; 9 trials, 1115 participants), as the certainty of evidence was very low for all these outcomes. FBHAs compared with non-FBHAs may have little or no effect on the risk of serious adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03; 9 trials, 1176 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for the outcomes in both comparisons (FBHAs versus no intervention and FBHAs versus non-FBHAs) was of very low certainty (or low certainty in one instance) and cannot justify the routine use of FBHAs to reduce blood loss in adult liver resection. While the meta-analysis showed a reduced risk of reoperation with FBHAs compared with non-FBHAs, the analysis was confounded by the small number of trials reporting the event and the risk of bias in all these trials. Future trials should focus on the use of FBHAs in people undergoing liver resection who are at particularly high risk of bleeding. Investigators should evaluate clinically meaningful and patient-important outcomes and follow the SPIRIT and CONSORT statements.

Fibrin Sealant TISSEEL Lyo as a haemostatic agent in vascular surgery: Results of randomized, controlled, patient-blinded, multicentre clinical study in the Russian population

BACKGROUND

This phase III, controlled, patient-blinded, multicentre study in two parallel, equal-sized treatment groups compared the efficacy and safety of TISSEEL Lyo, fibrin sealant versus Manual Compression (MC) with surgical gauze pads for use as a haemostatic agent in patients who underwent vascular surgery in Russia.

METHODS

Adult patients, both genders, who received peripheral vascular expanded polytetrafluoroethylene conduits and had suture line bleeding after surgical haemostasis were enrolled. Patients were randomized to be treated with TISSEEL Lyo or MC. The bleeding needed additional treatment and had to be assessed as grade 1 or 2 bleeding according to the Validated Intraoperative Bleeding scale. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving haemostasis at 4 min after treatment application (T4) at the study suture line, which was maintained until the closure of the surgical wound. The secondary efficacy endpoints included the proportion of patients achieving haemostasis at 6 min (T6) and 10 min (T10) after treatment application at the study suture line, which was maintained until closure of the surgical wound, as well as the proportion of patients with intraoperative and postoperative rebleeding. Safety outcomes included incidence of adverse events (AEs), surgical site infections and graft occlusions.

RESULTS

A total of 110 patients were screened; 104 patients were randomized: (TISSEEL Lyo: 51 [49%] patients; MC: 53 [51%] patients). T4 haemostasis was achieved in 43 (84.3%) patients in the TISSEEL Lyo group and in 11 (20.8%) patients in the MC group (p < 0.001). Significantly more patients in TISSEEL Lyo group achieved the haemostasis at T6 (relative risk (RR) of achieving haemostasis 1.74 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37; 2.35]) and T10 (RR 1.18 [95% CI 1.05; 1.38]) versus MC. No one had intraoperative rebleeding. Postoperative rebleeding was reported only in one patient in the MC group. No treatment-emergent serious AEs (TESAEs) related to TISSEEL Lyo/MC, TESAEs leading to withdrawal and TESAEs leading to death were reported in patients during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Data demonstrated TISSEEL Lyo had clinically and statistically significant superiority to MC as a haemostatic agent in vascular surgery at all measured time points including 4, 6 and 10 min and had proven to be safe.

Applicability and reproducibility of the validated intraoperative bleeding severity scale (VIBe scale) in liver surgery: A multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Bleeding is an intraoperative and postoperative complication of liver surgery of concern, and yet evidence to support utility and reproducibility of bleeding scales for liver surgery is limited. We determined the reproducibility of the clinician-reported validated intraoperative bleeding severity scale and its clinical value of implementation in liver surgery.

METHODS

In this descriptive and observational multicenter study, we assessed the performance of liver surgeons instructed on the clinician-reported intraoperative bleeding severity scale using training videos that covered all 5 grades of bleeding severity. Surgeons were stratified according to years of surgical experience and number of surgeries performed per year based on a median split in low and high values. Intraobserver and interobserver agreement was assessed using Kendall's coefficient of concordance (Kendall's W).

RESULTS

Forty-seven surgeons from 10 hospitals in Spain participated in the study. The overall intraobserver concordance was 0.985, and the overall interobserver concordance was 0.929. For "high experience" surgeons, the intraobserver and interobserver agreement values were 0.990 and 0.941, respectively. For "low experience" surgeons, the intraobserver and interobserver agreement was 0.981 and 0.922, respectively. Regarding the annual number of surgeries, intraobserver and interobserver agreement values were 0.995 and 0.940, respectively, for surgeons performing >35 surgeries per year, with 0.979 and 0.923, respectively, for surgeons who perform ≤35 surgeries year.

CONCLUSION

The clinician-reported intraoperative bleeding severity scale shows high interobserver and intraobserver concordance, suggesting it is a useful tool for assessing severity of bleeding during liver surgery; years of surgical experience and number of annual procedures performed did not affect the applicability of the clinician-reported intraoperative bleeding severity scale.

SPOT GRADE II: Clinical Validation of a New Method for Reproducibly Quantifying Surgical Wound Bleeding: Prospective, Multicenter, Multispecialty, Single-Arm Study

The SPOT GRADE (SG), a Surface Bleeding Severity Scale, is a unique visual method for assessing bleeding severity based on quantitative determinations of blood flow. This study assessed the reliability of the SG scale in a clinical setting and collected initial data on the safety and efficacy of HEMOBLAST Bellows (HB), a hemostatic agent, in abdominal and orthopedic operations. Twenty-seven patients were enrolled across 3 centers and received the investigational device. Bleeding severity and hemostasis were independently assessed by 2 surgical investigators at baseline and at 3, 6, and 10 minutes after application of HB and compared for agreement. The mean paired κ statistic for assignment of SG scores was .7754. The mean paired κ statistics for determining eligibility for participation in the trial based on bleeding severity and the mean paired κ statistics determining the presence of hemostasis were .9301 and .9301, respectively. The proportion of patients achieving hemostasis within 3, 6, and 10 minutes of HB application were 50.0%, 79.2%, and 91.7%, respectively. There were no unanticipated adverse device effects and one possible serious adverse device effect, as determined by the Independent Data Monitoring Committee (IDMC). The reliability of the SG scale was validated in a clinical setting. Initial data on the safety and efficacy of HB in abdominal and orthopedic operations were collected, and there were no concerns raised by the investigators or the IDMC.

Haemostatic Efficacy of Topical Agents During Liver Resection: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Trials

BACKGROUND

Hepatic resection carries a high risk of parenchymal bleeding both intra- and post-operatively. Topical haemostatic agents are frequently used to control bleeding during hepatectomy, with multiple products currently available. However, it remains unknown which of these is most effective for achieving haemostasis and improving peri-operative outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review and random-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomised trials investigating topical haemostatic agents in hepatic resection was performed. Interventions were analysed by grouping into similar products; fibrin patch, fibrin glue, collagen products, and control. Primary outcomes were the rate of haemostasis at 4 and 10 min.

RESULTS

Twenty randomized controlled trials were included in the network meta-analysis, including a total of 3267 patients and 7 different interventions. Fibrin glue and fibrin patch were the most effective interventions for achieving haemostasis at both 4 and 10 min. There were no significant differences between haemostatic agents with respect to blood loss, transfusion requirements, bile leak, post-operative complications, reoperation, or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Amongst the haemostatic agents currently available, fibrin patch and fibrin glue are the most effective methods for reducing time to haemostasis during liver resection, but have no effect on other peri-operative outcomes. Topical haemostatic agents should not be used routinely, but may be a useful adjunct to achieve haemostasis when needed.

Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of a new hemostatic powder using a quantitative surface bleeding severity scale

AIMS OF THE STUDY

The safety and efficacy of a hemostatic powder (HP) versus a control agent, absorbable gelatin sponge and thrombin (G + T), were assessed, using a validated, quantitative bleeding severity scale.

METHODS

Subjects were randomized to receive HP (256 subjects) or G + T (132 subjects) for treatment of minimal, mild, or moderate bleeding at 20 investigational sites. The primary efficacy endpoint was non-inferiority of HP relative to G + T for success at achieving hemostasis within 6 minutes. Secondary endpoints in rank order included: superiority of HP relative to G + T in mean preparation time; non-inferiority of HP relative to G + T for achieving hemostasis within 3 min; superiority of HP relative to G + T for achieving hemostasis within 6 min; and superiority of HP relative to G + T for success for achieving hemostasis within 3 min.

RESULTS

A total of 388 subjects were included in the primary efficacy analysis. At 6 min, hemostasis was achieved in 93.0% (238/256) of the HP group compared to 77.3% (102/132) of the G + T group (non-inferiority P < 0.0001, superiority P < 0.0001). All secondary endpoints were met. Complications were comparable between treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

HP had superior rates of hemostasis, shorter preparation time, and a similar safety profile compared to G + T in this prospective, randomized trial using quantitative bleeding severity criteria.

Mechanical strength of biliary defect closure after topical sealing: Comparison of four sealants in a porcine model

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Biliary leakage is a potential complication of liver resection and is still a concern. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of four routinely used sealants in preventing bile leakage under pressure from an induced perforation of the gallbladder in a porcine model.

METHODS

Forty Landrace pigs were randomly assigned to one of five groups. These included a control group (n = 8) and one group each for the sealants TachoSil®, TissuCol Duo®, Coseal®, and FloSeal® (n = 8 per group). In the control group, the perforation was left unsealed. To evaluate the biliostatic potential of the sealants, we measured the pressure that was needed to induce leakage (mmHg) and the gallbladder volume (cc) at the time of leakage in each group.

RESULTS

A significantly higher mean pressure was required to induce leakage in the sealant groups compared with the control group. However, the biliostatic effects were heterogeneous among the sealant groups. Sealants with the highest to lowest effectiveness were TachoSil, Coseal, TissuCol, and FloSeal. The mean gallbladder volume at the time of leakage also varied between sealant groups.

CONCLUSION

Biliostatic properties are markedly improved by the use of modern sealants compared with using no sealant. However, the advantages and disadvantages of using sealants should be carefully considered in each clinical situation. The effectiveness of the sealants should be evaluated in chronic and clinical studies.

A Prospective, Randomized, Phase III Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Fibrin Sealant Grifols as an Adjunct to Hemostasis as Compared to Cellulose Sheets in Hepatic Surgery Resections

BACKGROUND

Local hemostatic agents have a role in limiting bleeding complications associated with liver resection.

METHODS

In this randomized, phase III study, we compared the efficacy and safety of Fibrin Sealant Grifols (FS Grifols) with oxidized cellulose sheets (Surgicel®) as adjuncts to hemostasis during hepatic resections. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving hemostasis at target bleeding sites (TBS) within 4 min (T₄) of treatment application. Secondary efficacy variables were time to hemostasis (TTH) at a later time point if re-bleeding occurs and cumulative proportion of patients achieving hemostasis by time points T₂, T₃, T₅, T₇, and T₁₀.

RESULTS

The rate of hemostasis by T₄ was 92.8% in the FS Grifols group (n = 163) and 80.5% in the Surgicel® group (n = 162) (p = 0.01). The mean TTH was significantly shorter (p < 0.001) in the FS Grifols group (2.8 ± 0.14 vs. 3.8 ± 0.24 min). The rate of hemostasis by T₂, T₅, and T₇ was higher and statistically superior in the FS Grifols group compared to Surgicel®. No substantial differences in adverse events (AE) were noted between treatment groups. The most common AEs were procedural pain (36.2 vs. 37.7%), nausea (20.9 vs. 23.5%), and hypotension (14.1 vs 6.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

FS Grifols was safe and well tolerated as a local hemostatic agent during liver resection surgeries. Overall, data demonstrate that the hemostatic efficacy of FS Grifols is superior to Surgicel® and support the use of FS Grifols as an effective local hemostatic agent in these surgical procedures.

The use of fibrin sealant during non-emergency surgery: a systematic review of evidence of benefits and harms

BACKGROUND

Fibrin sealants are used in different types of surgery to prevent the accumulation of post-operative fluid (seroma) or blood (haematoma) or to arrest haemorrhage (bleeding). However, there is uncertainty around the benefits and harms of fibrin sealant use.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence on the benefits and harms of fibrin sealants in non-emergency surgery in adults.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases [MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library (including the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, the Health Technology Assessment database and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials)] were searched from inception to May 2015. The websites of regulatory bodies (the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, the European Medicines Agency and the Food and Drug Administration) were also searched to identify evidence of harms.

REVIEW METHODS

This review included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies using any type of fibrin sealant compared with standard care in non-emergency surgery in adults. The primary outcome was risk of developing seroma and haematoma. Only RCTs were used to inform clinical effectiveness and both RCTs and observational studies were used for the assessment of harms related to the use of fibrin sealant. Two reviewers independently screened all titles and abstracts to identify potentially relevant studies. Data extraction was undertaken by one reviewer and validated by a second. The quality of included studies was assessed independently by two reviewers using the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool for RCTs and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidance for adverse events for observational studies. A fixed-effects model was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

We included 186 RCTs and eight observational studies across 14 surgical specialties and five reports from the regulatory bodies. Most RCTs were judged to be at an unclear risk of bias. Adverse events were inappropriately reported in observational studies. Meta-analysis across non-emergency surgical specialties did not show a statistically significant difference in the risk of seroma for fibrin sealants versus standard care in 32 RCTs analysed [n = 3472, odds ratio (OR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68 to 1.04; p = 0.13; I² = 12.7%], but a statistically significant benefit was found on haematoma development in 24 RCTs (n = 2403, OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.86; p = 0.01; I² = 0%). Adverse events related to fibrin sealant use were reported in 10 RCTs and eight observational studies across surgical specialties, and 22 RCTs explicitly stated that there were no adverse events. One RCT reported a single death but no other study reported mortality or any serious adverse events. Five regulatory body reports noted death from air emboli associated with fibrin sprays.

LIMITATIONS

It was not possible to provide a detailed evaluation of individual RCTs in their specific contexts because of the limited resources that were available for this research. In addition, the number of RCTs that were identified made it impractical to conduct independent data extraction by two reviewers in the time available.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness of fibrin sealants does not appear to vary according to surgical procedures with regard to reducing the risk of seroma or haematoma. Surgeons should note the potential risk of gas embolism if spray application of fibrin sealants is used and not to exceed the recommended pressure and spraying distance. Future research should be carried out in surgery specialties for which only limited data were found, including neurological, gynaecological, oral and maxillofacial, urology, colorectal and orthopaedics surgery (for any outcome); breast surgery and upper gastrointestinal (development of haematoma); and cardiothoracic heart or lung surgery (reoperation rates). In addition, studies need to use adequate sample sizes, to blind participants and outcome assessors, and to follow reporting guidelines.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015020710.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Methods to decrease blood loss during liver resection: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Liver resection is a major surgery with significant mortality and morbidity. Specialists have tested various methods in attempts to limit blood loss, transfusion requirements, and morbidity during elective liver resection. These methods include different approaches (anterior versus conventional approach), use of autologous blood donation, cardiopulmonary interventions such as hypoventilation, low central venous pressure, different methods of parenchymal transection, different methods of management of the raw surface of the liver, different methods of vascular occlusion, and different pharmacological interventions. A surgeon typically uses only one of the methods from each of these seven categories. The optimal method to decrease blood loss and transfusion requirements in people undergoing liver resection is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different interventions for decreasing blood loss and blood transfusion requirements during elective liver resection.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index Expanded to September 2015 to identify randomised clinical trials. We also searched trial registers and handsearched the references lists of identified trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) comparing different methods of decreasing blood loss and blood transfusion requirements in people undergoing liver resection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified trials and collected data. We assessed the risk of bias using Cochrane domains. We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method in WinBUGS 1.4, following the guidelines of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance documents. We calculated the odds ratios (OR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) for the binary outcomes, mean differences (MD) with 95% CrI for continuous outcomes, and rate ratios with 95% CrI for count outcomes, using a fixed-effect model or random-effects model according to model-fit. We assessed the evidence with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 67 randomised clinical trials involving a total of 6197 participants. All the trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 5771 participants from 64 trials provided data for one or more outcomes included in this review. There was no evidence of differences in most of the comparisons, and where there was, these differences were in single trials, mostly of small sample size. We summarise only the evidence that was available in more than one trial below. Of the primary outcomes, the only one with evidence of a difference from more than one trial under the pair-wise comparison was in the number of adverse events (complications), which was higher with radiofrequency dissecting sealer than with the clamp-crush method (rate ratio 1.85, 95% CrI 1.07 to 3.26; 250 participants; 3 studies; very low-quality evidence). Among the secondary outcomes, the only differences we found from more than one trial under the pair-wise comparison were the following: blood transfusion (proportion) was higher in the low central venous pressure group than in the acute normovolemic haemodilution plus low central venous pressure group (OR 3.19, 95% CrI 1.56 to 6.95; 208 participants; 2 studies; low-quality evidence); blood transfusion quantity (red blood cells) was lower in the fibrin sealant group than in the control (MD -0.53 units, 95% CrI -1.00 to -0.07; 122 participants; 2; very low-quality evidence); blood transfusion quantity (fresh frozen plasma) was higher in the oxidised cellulose group than in the fibrin sealant group (MD 0.53 units, 95% CrI 0.36 to 0.71; 80 participants; 2 studies; very low-quality evidence); blood loss (MD -0.34 L, 95% CrI -0.46 to -0.22; 237 participants; 4 studies; very low-quality evidence), total hospital stay (MD -2.42 days, 95% CrI -3.91 to -0.94; 197 participants; 3 studies; very low-quality evidence), and operating time (MD -15.32 minutes, 95% CrI -29.03 to -1.69; 192 participants; 4 studies; very low-quality evidence) were lower with low central venous pressure than with control. For the other comparisons, the evidence for difference was either based on single small trials or there was no evidence of differences. None of the trials reported health-related quality of life or time needed to return to work.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Paucity of data meant that we could not assess transitivity assumptions and inconsistency for most analyses. When direct and indirect comparisons were available, network meta-analysis provided additional effect estimates for comparisons where there were no direct comparisons. However, the paucity of data decreases the confidence in the results of the network meta-analysis. Low-quality evidence suggests that liver resection using a radiofrequency dissecting sealer may be associated with more adverse events than with the clamp-crush method. Low-quality evidence also suggests that the proportion of people requiring a blood transfusion is higher with low central venous pressure than with acute normovolemic haemodilution plus low central venous pressure; very low-quality evidence suggests that blood transfusion quantity (red blood cells) was lower with fibrin sealant than control; blood transfusion quantity (fresh frozen plasma) was higher with oxidised cellulose than with fibrin sealant; and blood loss, total hospital stay, and operating time were lower with low central venous pressure than with control. There is no evidence to suggest that using special equipment for liver resection is of any benefit in decreasing the mortality, morbidity, or blood transfusion requirements (very low-quality evidence). Radiofrequency dissecting sealer should not be used outside the clinical trial setting since there is low-quality evidence for increased harm without any evidence of benefits. In addition, it should be noted that the sample size was small and the credible intervals were wide, and we cannot rule out considerable benefit or harm with a specific method of liver resection.

An update on topical haemostatic agents in liver surgery: systematic review and meta analysis

Mortality and morbidity in hepatic surgery are affected by blood loss and transfusion. Topical haemostatic agents (THA) are composed by a matrix and/or fibrin sealants, and their association known as "carrier-bound fibrin sealant" (CBFS): despite widely used for secondary haemostasis, the level of evidence remains low. To realize a meta-analysis on the results of CBFS on haemostasis and postoperative complications. Searches in PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane and Google Scholar using keywords: "topical_haemostasis" OR "haemostatic_agents" OR "sealant_patch" OR "fibrin_sealant" OR "collagen_sealant" AND "liver_surgery" OR "hepatic_surgery" OR "liver_transplantation". Randomized clinical trials, large retrospective cohort studies, case control studies evaluating THA on open/laparoscopic liver surgery and transplantation. From 1993 to 2016 were found 22 studies for qualitative synthesis and 13 for quantitative meta-analysis. The time to haemostasis was lower in the CBFS group (mean difference -2.33 min; P = 0.00001). The risk of receiving blood transfusion, developing collections and bile leak was not influenced by the use of CBFS (OR 0.75; P = 0.25), (OR 0.72; P = 0.52), (OR 0.74; P = 0.30) respectively. The use of CBFS in liver surgery significantly reduce the time to haemostasis, but does not decrease transfusion, postoperative collection and bile leak.

In Vivo Neural Tissue Engineering: Cylindrical Biocompatible Hydrogels That Create New Neural Tracts in the Adult Mammalian Brain

Individuals with neurodegenerative disorders or brain injury have few treatment options and it has been proposed that endogenous adult neural stem cells can be harnessed to repopulate dysfunctional nonneurogenic regions of the brain. We have accomplished this through the development of rationally designed hydrogel implants that recruit endogenous cells from the adult subventricular zone to create new relatively long tracts of neuroblasts. These implants are biocompatible and biodegradable cylindrical hydrogels consisting of fibrin and immobilized neurotrophic factors. When implanted into rat brain such that the cylinder intersected the migratory path of endogenous neural progenitors (the rostral migratory stream) and led into the nonneurogenic striatum, we observed a robust neurogenic response in the form of migrating neuroblasts with long (>100 μm) complex neurites. The location of these new neural cells in the striatum was directly coincident with the original track of the fibrin implant, which itself had completely degraded, and covered a significant area and distance (>2.5 mm). We also observed a significant number of neuroblasts in the striatal region between the implant track and the lateral ventricle. When these fibrin cylinders were implanted into hemiparkinson rats, correction of parkinsonian behavior was observed. There were no obvious behavioral, inflammatory or tumorigenic sequelae as a consequence of the implants. In conclusion, we have successfully engineered neural tissue in vivo, using neurogenic biomaterials cast into a unique cylindrical architecture. These results represent a novel approach to efficiently induce neurogenesis in a controlled and targeted manner, which may lead toward a new therapeutic modality for neurological disorders.