Celox or QuickClot?

H

HEATAndy

Full Registered User
Ladies and Gents,

After personal experience on this I currently use Celox, used to use the Issued Quickclot but I have seen several cases of burns around the wound site caused by it and the need to remove it prior to treatment (Celox breaks down naturally). Were these a series of isolated incidents or has anyone else experienced this?
 
First gen Quickclot had issues with heat generation from rapid absorption of water from the blood, new stuff is supposed to be much better and the newer 'delivery methods' make it better still (Sponges, pads etc rather than the loose powder) - never used Celox and only had to use QC once but it did what it was supposed to.
 
As MrBlonde correctly points out, all the first/second generation QC powders exhibited an exothermic reaction.

The current generation QC sponges and gauze use chitosan (the same derivative of shellfish used in Celox and HemCon) and do not have this reaction, as well as being considerably easier to handle/apply.
 
It would be a better comparison to look at Celox and Combat Gauze.

I have used both of these in anger and they both work. The Celox fills the wound cavity better but it is bulkier to carry. Combat Gauze is smaller in the pack but you may need two to fill the wound cavity.

Celox uses shellfish Chitosan which makes the blood stickier and easier to clot.

Combat Gauze is clay based and absorbs water in order to compact the clotting factors.

The cost is roughly the same.

You mentioned Quick Clot. Have used in anger. It worked but you need a lot of practice before going live with it. The heat wasn't an issue for the operator but it did cause additional injuries to the casualty. I am quite happy that we have moved past that one.


source: Several of our faculty are former faculty members of the UK Battlefield Advanced Trauma Life Support (BATLS)
 
As long as you use the one of the gauzes, they achieve pretty much the same result. I've used both in the same hole, and as RMI says - you get a bit more in the Celox packet.

Plus you can get them cheaper / in bulk on ebay.
 
Thanks for the replies guys I had a chat with a friend who now works at the Institute of Naval Medicine at Alverstoke (Ran into at Fort Blockhouse). Who has indicated that they after testing they are now chemically much of a muchness so it is only the delivery system which differs. They did however mention that the new Celox syringe applicator will stop a groin penetrating bullet wound which severs the Femoral from bleeding in 3 1/2 mins. The report that was conducted showed a 100% success rate in the pig subjects tested on.
 
HEATAndy said:
They did however mention that the new Celox syringe applicator will stop a groin penetrating bullet wound which severs the Femoral from bleeding in 3 1/2 mins. The report that was conducted showed a 100% success rate in the pig subjects tested on.
Click to expand...

I would like to see this research. We tried some Celox that came in a toothpaste like applicator a few years ago and found that it was impossible to push toothpaste up stream into a catastrophic haemorrhage. How did they sort that one out?
 
It's in a syringe-like injectorwith a wide end. I've seen the company videos on a pig arterial wound and in those, it did what it was supposed to. I think they are available to view on the Celox website. I've never used it in anger, though, so can't comment on that.
 
Seadog said:
I've seen the company videos on a pig arterial wound and in those, it did what it was supposed to.
Click to expand...

Be cautious when reading company websites. They will say anything to sell a product.

A quick google-fu turned up research that showed no difference between any of the haemostatic options compared to standard gauze. Way back in the 80s we didn't have all of this magic pixie dust. We stopped catastrophic haemorrhage with good ol' direct pressure. It is nice to see current research backing up that archaic concept of "pushing where the red stuff comes out."

Sales reps can make anything look good. There are still sandy places in the world that teaches putting camel dung into wound cavities. They say that when you push on that sh*te filled wound that the bleeding stops. Funny that. Just get rid of your casualty before the six hour window when they start getting sepsis.

The basic premise is this: Good training is more important that buying expensive kit or listening to a sales rep in a mini skirt. Do your research and use scientifically proven methods.

Source
 
RemoteMedicineIreland said:
Be cautious when reading company websites. They will say anything to sell a product.

A quick google-fu turned up research that showed no difference between any of the haemostatic options compared to standard gauze. Way back in the 80s we didn't have all of this magic pixie dust. We stopped catastrophic haemorrhage with good ol' direct pressure. It is nice to see current research backing up that archaic concept of "pushing where the red stuff comes out."

Sales reps can make anything look good. There are still sandy places in the world that teaches putting camel dung into wound cavities. They say that when you push on that sh*te filled wound that the bleeding stops. Funny that. Just get rid of your casualty before the six hour window when they start getting sepsis.

The basic premise is this: Good training is more important that buying expensive kit or listening to a sales rep in a mini skirt. Do your research and use scientifically proven methods.

Source
Click to expand...

Don't worry, RMI, I'm well versed in appraising the original evidence for myself and did not get the video from the website. I also get copies of the original articles and assess those in light of the breadth of evidence in the subject. However, the video is there for those who want to see how this version of the product is used. The reason I haven't used it myself is that I'm not convinced that for my areas of work it adds anything to the haemostatic-of-your-choice and pressure.

And don't forget, there has never been a randomised controlled trial that shows that getting your appendix out does anything for appendicitis. Know your subject, have plenty of real patient experience under your belt and know how to read the original papers. That is, if the pharmaceutical companies will release them...
 
I agree with this. However, the biggest LIMFAC with the new generation of impregnated gauze is knowing how to use it...you absolutely must get to the source of the bleeding for it to work and hold pressure. As most of us know, if you don't, you have wasted the gauze.
 
I know this is not a gauze per se, but in terms of hemorrhage control, has anyone used this before?

SWAT-T (Stretch, Wrap, And Tuck-Tourniquet) - Soldier Systems Daily

Feel free to smack me in the face if it seems that I have hijacked the thread.

That being said, we had been using QuickClots in our standard trauma bags for several years with positive results; but then again there weren't that many cases to fully vouch for it.

Back in the old days it was just a cravat and basic gauze ;)
 
Back
Top