← Articles

Anderson et al: A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
Veterinary Surgery 2, 2025

🔍 Key Findings

  • Study Design: Prospective, randomized clinical trial of 45 dogs undergoing liver biopsy or lobectomy.
  • Groups:
    • Adhesive gelatin sponge (AG) group (n=22)
    • Plain collagen sponge (PC) group (n=23)
  • Main Results:
    • At 5 minutes post-application, 10/20 PC dogs were still bleeding vs. 2/20 AG dogs (p = 0.0138).
    • AG had significantly better adhesion scores (median 2 vs. 1, p < 0.001).
    • Sponge dislodgement: 5/23 in PC group, 0/22 in AG group (p = 0.042).
    • Time to 50% hemostasis: AG = 2 min, PC = 4 min 49 sec.
  • Complications: No adverse events related to either sponge.
  • Conclusion: Adhesive gelatin sponges offered superior intraoperative adhesion and hemostatic control during canine liver surgery compared to collagen sponges.
A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery

Simini Surgery Review Podcast

How critical is this paper for crushing the Boards?

🚨 Must-know. I’d bet on seeing this.

📚 Useful background, not must-know.

💤 Skip it. Doubt it’ll ever show up.

Thanks for the feedback!
‍We'll keep fine-tuning the articles vault.
Oops — didn’t go through.
‍Mind trying that again?
← Articles

Anderson et al: A randomized comparison of an adhesive gelatin sponge and a plain collagen sponge for hemostatic control during canine liver surgery
Veterinary Surgery 2, 2025

🔍 Key Findings

  • Study Design: Prospective, randomized clinical trial of 45 dogs undergoing liver biopsy or lobectomy.
  • Groups:
    • Adhesive gelatin sponge (AG) group (n=22)
    • Plain collagen sponge (PC) group (n=23)
  • Main Results:
    • At 5 minutes post-application, 10/20 PC dogs were still bleeding vs. 2/20 AG dogs (p = 0.0138).
    • AG had significantly better adhesion scores (median 2 vs. 1, p < 0.001).
    • Sponge dislodgement: 5/23 in PC group, 0/22 in AG group (p = 0.042).
    • Time to 50% hemostasis: AG = 2 min, PC = 4 min 49 sec.
  • Complications: No adverse events related to either sponge.
  • Conclusion: Adhesive gelatin sponges offered superior intraoperative adhesion and hemostatic control during canine liver surgery compared to collagen sponges.

Simini Surgery Review Podcast

Know What Matters in the Literature - and Why

We distill peer-reviewed surgical studies into clinically relevant summaries and
exam-style questions, so you can make informed decisions with confidence.

Free Access. No Spam. Just Smarter Surgical Learning

Multiple Choice Questions on this study

In Anderson 2025 et al., on liver hemostatic agents, which sponge showed significantly less bleeding at 5 minutes post-application?

A. Plain collagen sponge
B. Adhesive gelatin sponge
C. Bovine thrombin-collagen matrix
D. Fibrin glue
E. Microfibrillar cellulose

Answer: Adhesive gelatin sponge

Explanation: At 5 minutes post-application, 2/20 AG vs. 10/20 PC dogs were still bleeding, indicating significantly better hemostasis with AG (p = .0138).
In Anderson 2025 et al., on liver hemostatic agents, what was reported postoperatively regarding complications from sponge use?

A. Mild allergic reaction in 10% of cases
B. Delayed hemorrhage in AG group
C. Foreign body reaction in PC group
D. No complications attributed to sponge use
E. Severe inflammatory reaction in AG group

Answer: No complications attributed to sponge use

Explanation: No adverse events or complications related to sponge type were reported postoperatively.
In Anderson 2025 et al., on liver hemostatic agents, how did the AG sponge perform compared to the PC sponge in terms of adhesion?

A. The AG sponge adhered less well than PC
B. The AG sponge tore more often
C. The AG sponge had equal adhesion to PC
D. The AG sponge had significantly better adhesion
E. The AG sponge required suturing to stay in place

Answer: The AG sponge had significantly better adhesion

Explanation: Median adhesion scores were 2 (AG) vs. 1 (PC) with p < .001, and 0/22 AG vs. 6/23 PC scored zero adhesion.
In Anderson 2025 et al., on liver hemostatic agents, what was observed regarding sponge dislodgement during abdominal lavage?

A. None of the PC sponges dislodged
B. All PC sponges dislodged
C. Dislodgement occurred in 5/23 cases
D. Dislodgement occurred in 10/23 cases
E. Only AG sponges dislodged

Answer: Dislodgement occurred in 5/23 cases

Explanation: 5 of 23 PC sponges dislodged during lavage and required replacement due to bleeding; no AG sponges dislodged (p = .042).
In Anderson 2025 et al., on liver hemostatic agents, what was the time to 50% hemostasis for the AG group?

A. 6 minutes 30 seconds
B. 4 minutes 49 seconds
C. 3 minutes 15 seconds
D. 2 minutes 00 seconds
E. 1 minute 30 seconds

Answer: 2 minutes 00 seconds

Explanation: Time to 50% hemostasis was 2:00 in AG vs. 4:49 in PC, demonstrating more rapid effect with the AG sponge.

Access the full library of surgical summaries and exam-style questions.

Get Instant Access

Educational content developed independently and supported by Simini.

The maker of Simini Protect Lavage.

Review More Key Summaries from this Veterinary Surgery Journal Issue

Butare-Smith

 et al: 

Double-loop cerclage resists greater loads for more cycles than twist and single-loop cerclage

Winston

 et al: 

Management and outcomes of 13 dogs treated with a modified Heller myotomy and Dor fundoplication for lower esophageal sphincter achalasia-like syndrome

Garcia

 et al: 

Use of intraoperative transsplenic injection of agitated saline to confirm temporary full attenuation of congenital extrahepatic portosystemic shunts in dogs

Deveci

 et al: 

Evaluation of 3D‐printed patient‐specific guides to facilitate fluoroscopic‐assisted iliosacral screw placement in dogs

Israel

 et al: 

Outcome of canine cementless collared stem total hip replacement with proximal femoral periprosthetic cerclage application: 184 consecutive cases