ArticleMedical devices (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
Preclinical Performance Evaluation of an Oxidized Regenerated Cellulose Hemostat: Antibacterial Activity and Wound Healing Outcomes.
Article in Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) complicates surgical site infections (SSI), making it important to address surgical bleeding and bacterial bioburden. Oxidized regenerated cellulose (ORC) is a topical hemostat that generates a localized acidic microenvironment hostile to the survival of microbes. The present study evaluated the intrinsic antibacterial action and wound healing results of a commercial ORC-based hemostat in an infected wound environment. Methods: In vitro and in vivo experimental designs were used to evaluate the antibacterial activity. An in vitro experiment was designed to show inhibition zones against 32 Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial strains, including antibiotic-resistant pathogens, compared to the negative control. In vivo efficacy was tested in a Wistar rat excisional wound model (n = 42), in which polymicrobial inoculation was performed with the same bacterial strains, and animals allocated to specific groups were monitored for hemostasis time, wound contraction, clinical observations, and histopathology over 28 days. Results: Using an agar diffusion method, ORC hemostat exhibited in vitro antibacterial activity against all the 32 tested strains. In vivo, hemostasis time was significantly reduced in the test groups compared to that in the disease control group (adjusted p < 0.001), achieving hemostasis within 42.2-54 seconds. Similarly, wound healing was statistically significant for the test specimens, achieving up to 88.5% wound closure by day 28 (adjusted p < 0.001). Histopathological analysis after 28 days revealed complete re-epithelialization of the wound bed and reduced inflammatory infiltration. Conclusion: Within the study limitations, the commercial ORC-based hemostat (Surgi-ORC
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.