ObjectiveTo systematically review the hemostatic effect of traditional Class Ⅲ hemostatic powder and aggregate absorbable hemostat in surgeries. MethodsThe PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect controlled studies related to the objects from inception to September 18th, 2023. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed by using RevMan 5.3 software. ResultsA total of 7 randomized controlled trials, 5 cohort studies and 9 animal experiments were included. The results of analysis showed that the group with traditional Class Ⅲ hemostatic powder or aggregate absorbable hemostat had a higher hemostatic success rate and shorter hemostatic time than those with no hemostatic material in animal surgeries. And the group with aggregate absorbable hemostat had a higher 10min hemostatic success rate than those with traditional hemostatic measures. The application of traditional Class Ⅲ hemostatic powder in human cardiothoracic surgeries shortened the hemostatic time and reduced drainage after surgeries, but caused more blood loss during knee arthroplasties. Aggregate absorbable hemostat caused less blood loss than traditional hemostatic measures in human hip arthroplasties, and the 5min and 10min success rates of aggregate absorbable hemostat group were not worse than those of hemostatic gauze. ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that the hemostatic effect of both traditional Class Ⅲ hemostatic powder and aggregate absorbable hemostat are better than that of no hemostatic material in animal and human surgery, but the comparison between them and other hemostatic measures is not clear. Due to the limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusion.