Peter Graves: When the Bleeding Does Not Stop
Peter Graves, Independent Consultant Driving Innovation in Surgical Infection Prevention and Patient Safety, shared a post on LinkedIn:
”When the Bleeding Does Not Stop: The Hidden Burden of Disruptive Surgical Hemorrhage
Surgical bleeding remains one of the most common intra- and post-operative complications, varying in severity based on patient, procedure, hospital, and provider factors. While most bleeding can be managed with standard measures such as suturing or direct pressure, disruptive surgical bleeding occurs when hemorrhage or hematoma complicates the procedure despite these interventions. This type of bleeding is not only clinically significant but also economically burdensome.
Hemostatic agents are frequently deployed when conventional measures fall short. These agents vary in mechanism and application and are chosen based on patient characteristics, coagulation status, surgical site, and surgeon preference. Yet, even with their use, disruptive bleeding still occurs and carries serious consequences.
A recent large real-world analysis of nearly 120,000 patients undergoing bariatric surgery, colorectal surgery, spine surgery, total hip arthroplasty, and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revealed that 10.8% experienced disruptive bleeding despite hemostat use. Incidence varied widely by procedure, from 5.4% in bariatric surgery and 5.6% in TKA to 20% in colorectal surgery. The impact was significant. Disruptive bleeding significantly prolonged operating room time, increased ICU admissions, ventilator use, length of stay, and 90-day readmission. Mortality rose notably in bariatric surgery patients, reaching an alarming 55% when bleeding occurred.
The economic burden was equally striking. Incremental hospital costs ranged from $3,377 for TKA to $23,346 for colorectal surgery. These costs reflect not only additional resources consumed during the index hospitalization but also downstream effects such as readmissions and extended recovery.
This study confirms that disruptive surgical bleeding remains an unmet challenge even with hemostatic agent use. The findings highlight the urgent need for innovation in surgical bleeding control, optimization of topical agents, and broader adoption of enhanced recovery and risk-reduction strategies. For hospitals and health systems, improving bleeding management is not simply a clinical imperative but a financial necessity.
The evidence is clear. When bleeding persists, patient outcomes worsen, costs climb, and the value of surgery is compromised. Future solutions must address both the clinical and economic dimensions of this challenge.”
Reed full article here.
Title: Retrospective Database Analysis of the Clinical and Economic Outcomes Associated with Disruptive Surgical Bleeding
Authors: Mosadoluwa Afolabi, Prathiksha N V, Amitha Kumar, Walter A Danker III, Stephen S Johnston

Stay updated on all scientific advances with Hemostasis Today.
-
Nov 27, 2025, 16:00Nathan Connell on WFH AI Summaries from the Global Forum
-
Nov 27, 2025, 15:49Piotr Czempik: Rethinking Coagulation in Acute Liver Dysfunction
-
Nov 27, 2025, 15:35Overwhelmed? A Leader’s Guide from Mark Crowther to Getting Back on Track
-
Nov 27, 2025, 15:10Wolfgang Miesbach’s Top 10 Picks for TTP and Thrombosis from ASH 2025
-
Nov 27, 2025, 14:24ICCBBA’s Executive Director Eoin McGrath Chairs a Dynamic Session on AI, Innovation and Informatics in Transfusion Medicine
-
Nov 27, 2025, 13:26Wolfgang Miesbach’s Top 10 Picks for Bleeding Disorders from ASH 2025
-
Nov 27, 2025, 11:19Priya Prasad Presents a Case of Severe Hypotensive Transfusion Reaction
-
Nov 27, 2025, 04:07Eugene Tang Presents Highlights from UK Stroke Forum 2025
-
Nov 27, 2025, 03:47Michael Makris: I Believe the Time Has Come to Consider Emicizumab Up Front in Persons with Acquired Hemophilia
