Atkin L, Rippon M. Autolysis: mechanisms of action in the removal of devitalised tissue. Br J Nurs. 2016; 25:S40-S47

Atkin L, Ousey K. Wound bed preparation: a novel approach using HydroTherapy. Br J Community Nurs. 2016; 21:S23-S28

Percival SL, Suleman L. Slough and biofilm: removal of barriers to wound healing by desloughing. J Wound Care. 2015; 24:(11)498-510

Newton H, Edwards J, Mitchell L, Percival SL. Role of slough and biofilm in delaying healing in chronic wounds. Br J Nurs. 2017; 26:S4-S11

Barrett S. Wound-bed preparation: a vital step in the healing process. Br J Nurs. 2017; 26:S24-S31

Schultz GS, Sibbald RG, Falanga V Wound bed preparation: a systematic approach to wound management. Wound Repair Regen. 2003; 11:(s1)S1-S28

Halim AS, Khoo TL, Mat Saad AZ. Wound bed preparation from a clinical perspective. Indian J Plast Surg. 2012; 45:(02)193-202

Everett E, Mathioudakis N. Update on management of diabetic foot ulcers. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2018; 1411:(1)153-165

Pérez-Panero AJ, Ruiz-Muñoz M, Cuesta-Vargas AI, Gónzalez-Sánchez M. Prevention, assessment, diagnosis and management of diabetic foot based on clinical practice guidelines. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019; 98:(35)

Marston W, Tang J, Kirsner RS, Ennis W. Wound healing society 2015 update on guidelines for venous ulcers. Wound Repair Regen. 2016; 24:(1)136-144

Hall L, Adderley U. Active debridement of venous leg ulcers: a literature review to inform clinical practice. Br J Community Nurs. 2019; 24:S24-S29

Gould L, Stuntz M, Giovannelli M Wound healing society 2015 update on guidelines for pressure ulcers. Wound Repair Regen. 2016; 24:(1)145-162

Bosanquet DC, Wright AM, White RD, Williams IM. A review of the surgical management of heel pressure ulcers in the 21st century. Int Wound J. 2016; 13:(1)9-16

Hindocha S, Gill P, Shokrollahi K. Burns eschar debridement: a review. J Wound Technol. 2013; 21:12-15

Gacto-Sanchez P. Surgical treatment and management of the severely burn patient: Review and update. Med Intensiva. 2017; 41:(6)356-364

Marinović M, Fumić N, Laginja S Basic principles of surgical treatment of chronic wounds – sharp debridement. Acta Med Croatica. 2016; 70:65-68

Atkin L. Understanding methods of wound debridement. Br J Nurs. 2014; 23:S10-S15

Nazarko L. Advances in wound debridement techniques. Br J Community Nurs. 2015;

Surgical debridement of wounds. 2011. (accessed 30 July 2020)

Rodd-Nielsen E, Harris CL. Conservative sharp wound debridement: an overview of Canadian education, practice, risk, and policy. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2013; 40:(6)594-601

Debridement options: BEAMS made easy. 2013. (accessed 27 July 2020)

Madhok BM, Vowden K, Vowden P. New techniques for wound debridement. Int Wound J. 2013; 10:(3)247-251

Suzuki K, Cowan L. Current concepts in wound debridement. Podiatry Today. 2009; 22:(7)40-48

Leitch J, van Vlymen J. Managing the perioperative patient on direct oral anticoagulants. Canadian J Anesthesia. 2017; 64:(6)656-672

Eichler H. Coagulation management in geriatric surgery. Der Chirurg. 2017; 88:(2)136-140

O'Neill DK, Robins B, Ayello EA Regional anaesthesia with sedation protocol to safely debride sacral pressure ulcers. Int Wound J. 2012; 9:(5)525-543

Schiffman J, Golinko MS, Yan A Operative debridement of pressure ulcers. World J Surg. 2009; 33:(7)1396-1402

Neveleff DJ, Kraiss LW, Schulman CS. Implementing methods to improve perioperative hemostasis in the surgical and trauma settings. AORN J. 2010; 92:(5)S1-S15

Groenewold MD, Gribnau AJ, Ubbink DT. Topical haemostatic agents for skin wounds: a systematic review. BMC Surg. 2011; 11:(1)

Millner RW, Lockhart AS, Marr R, Jones K. Omni-Stat (Chitosan) arrests bleeding in heparinised subjects in vivo: an experimental study in a model of major peripheral vascular injury. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011; 39:(6)952-954

Pollock SV. Electrosurgery, 4th edn. In: Bolognia JL, Schaffer JV, Cerroni L (eds). : Elsevier; 2017

Carpenter S, Shaffett TP. Choosing the best debridement modality to ‘battle’ necrotic tissue: pros and cons. Today's Wound Clinic. 2017; 11:(7)

Hainer BL. Electrosurgery for the skin. Am Fam Physician. 2002; 66:(7)1259-1266

Meeuwsen FC, Guédon AC, Arkenbout EA The art of electrosurgery: trainees and experts. Surg Innov. 2017; 24:(4)373-378

Lane JE, O'brien EM, Kent DE. Optimization of thermocautery in excisional dermatologic surgery. Dermatol Surg. 2006; 32:(5)669-675

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:(5)S1-S20

Snyder RJ, Sigal BD. The importance of hemostasis in chronic wound care: an openlabel controlled clinical study of OMNI-STAT (chitosan) versus standard of care in post-debridement treatment of patients with chronic wounds with or without concomitant use of anticoagulants. Wound Care Hyperb Oxygen. 2013; 4:(2)9-16

Madni TD, Imran JB, Clark AT Prospective evaluation of operating room inefficiency. J Burn Care Res. 2018; 39:(6)977-981

Nilsson GH, Björholt I, Krakau I. Anticoagulant treatment of patients with chronic atrial fibrillation in primary health care in Sweden—a retrospective study of incidence and quality in a registered population. Fam Pract. 2004; 21:(6)612-616

Yang J, Tian F, Wang Z Effect of chitosan molecular weight and deacetylation degree on hemostasis. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2008; 84B:(1)131-137

Klokkevold PR, Fukayama H, Sung EC, Bertolami CN. The effect of chitosan (poly-N-acetyl glucosamine) on lingual hemostasis in heparinized rabbits. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999; 57:(1)49-52

Croisier F, Jérôme C. Chitosan-based biomaterials for tissue engineering. Eur Polym J. 2013; 49:(4)780-792

Misgav M, Lubetszki A, Brutman-Barazani T The hemostatic efficacy of chitosan-pads in hemodialysis patients with significant bleeding. J Vasc Access. 2017; 18:(3)220-224

Muzzi L, Tommasino G, Tucci E, Neri E. Successful use of a military haemostatic agent in patients undergoing extracorporeal circulatory assistance and delayed sternal closure. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2012; 14:(6)695-698

Dai T, Tanaka M, Huang YY, Hamblin MR. Chitosan preparations for wounds and burns: antimicrobial and wound-healing effects. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2011; 9:(7)857-879

Masud Rana AM, Ahmed SU, Alam F Electrosurgery dissection versus sharp dissection: effect on early postoperative wound complications in modified radical mastectomy. Mymensingh Med J. 2019; 28:(3)634-640

Massarweh NN, Cosgriff N, Slakey DP. Electrosurgery: history, principles, and current and future uses. J Am Coll Surg. 2006; 202:(3)520-530

Sebben JE. The hazards of electrosurgery. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1987; 16:(4)869-872

Bennett RG, Kraffert CA. Bacterial transference during electrodesiccation and electrocoagulation. Arch Dermatol. 1990; 126:(6)751-755

Lewin JM, Brauer JA, Ostad A. Surgical smoke and the dermatologist. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011; 65:(3)636-641

Berberian BJ, Burnett JW. The potential role of common dermatologic practice technics in transmitting disease. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1986; 15:(5)1057-1058

Management of postoperative bleeding in surgically debrided wounds: topical hemostat versus electrocautery

02 September 2020
Volume 4 · Issue 4



To compare the effectiveness of a temporary topical external hemostat (OMNI-STAT Granules, Omni-stat Medical Inc., US) versus the use of electrocautery for bleeding control in patients who have undergone surgical wound debridement. Time saved in the operating room (OR) was evaluated.


A prospective evaluation of use of a topical hemostat in an OR setting was compared with retrospective data collected using electrocautery to understand the time-saving benefits of using a topical hemostat versus electrocautery.


A total of 52 patients were treated with the topical hemostat, and 89 patients with electrocautery. The topical hemostat was shown to be as effective in achieving hemostasis post-surgical debridement as electrocautery, with the added benefits of significant time savings in the OR (reducing the mean total OR time by 19.1%). Additionally, preprocedure and surgical procedure times in patients treated with the topical hemostat were significantly reduced. The results showed that wounds treated with the topical hemostat demonstrated a more advanced stage of healing, which may be a result of the lack of tissue damage demonstrated with the topical hemostat compared with electrocautery.


This study found that the temporary topical hemostat was equally as effective as cauterisation in achieving hemostasis. In addition, significant saving in OR time was demonstrated relative to electrocautery. The improved OR times may translate into increased cost-effectiveness, relative to electrocautery, by increasing the number of surgical cases per day and/or using resources more effectively to treat more patients. It may also enable bleeding control in the outpatient clinic or at the bedside, freeing up costly OR time and enabling more effective management of healthcare resources.

In the normal wound healing process, healing is aided by the removal of dead (necrotic) and damaged tissue through the process of autolytic debridement.1 However, in hard-to-heal wounds, this necrotic tissue may build up on the wound bed, acting as a physical barrier to wound progression, and prevent granulation tissue formation if it is not removed.2 Necrotic tissue also provides a nidus for bacterial growth, leading to biofilm formation and possible infection.3 Whether by natural means (autolysis) or by clinical intervention (for example, surgical), removal of necrotic tissue is a prerequisite for healing,3,4 thus removing a major physical obstacle to healing5 and ‘normalising’ the wound environment by providing a healthier wound bed to support wound repair.6,7

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting Wound Central and reading some of our peer-reviewed resources for wound care professionals. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Access to clinical or professional articles

  • New content and clinical updates each month