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

National Research Center Named after Academician E.N. Meshalkin, Novosibirsk, Russia. A.M. Nikiforov All-Russian Center of Emergency and Radiation Medicine, St-Petersburg, Russia. State Novosibirsk Regional Clinical Hospital, Novosibirsk, Russia. Institute of Cluster Oncology Named after L. L. Levshin of the Sechenov University, Moscow, Russia. City Clinical Hospital Named after S. S. Yudin, Moscow, Russia. Rostov State Medical University, Rostov-on-Don, Russia. RINGGOLD: 104709 Ryazan State Medical University Named after Academician I.P. Pavlov, Ryazan, Russia.

Science progress. 2023;106(3):368504231182834
Full text from:
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 (T(4)) 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 (T(6)) and 10 min (T(10)) 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). T(4) 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 T(6) (relative risk (RR) of achieving haemostasis 1.74 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.37; 2.35]) and T(10) (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.
Study details
Language : eng
Credits : Bibliographic data from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine