© 2018 Association of Military Surgeons of the United States. Introduction Acute hemorrhage remains the leading cause of death in potentially survivable injuries. The use of topical hemostatic agents has increased over the last two decades with the evolution of damage control surgery. By 2008, the military widely adopted Combat Gauze as the hemostatic dressing of choice for compressible hemorrhage. The goal of this study was to compare the performance of a novel fibrin sealant patch to Combat Gauze in two clinically relevant models of hemorrhage. Materials and Methods Yorkshire swine underwent unilateral femoral artery puncture or a grade V liver laceration with timed free bleeding then received either the fibrin patch or Combat Gauze packing with 3 minutes of standardized pressure. Animals were then resuscitated to maintain a mean arterial pressure of 60 mmHg for 4 hours. Hemostasis, blood loss, resuscitation volume, survival, vessel patency, and hematologic parameters were evaluated. Results Hemostasis was equivalent in both groups after hepatic and vascular injury. Survival was 80% in the fibrin patch vascular injury group and 100% in all other groups. Hematologic parameters were not significantly different between treatment groups. Femoral artery patency was 80% in both groups after vascular injury. With simulated ambulation after vessel injury, 60% of the Combat Gauze group and 80% of the fibrin patch group remained hemostatic (p > 0.05). In simulated re-exploration with packing removal, all animals rebled after hemostatic product removal. Conclusion There was no significant difference in hemostasis between a novel fibrin patch and Combat Gauze after extremity arterial or hepatic injury. This novel fibrin patch may have a clinical advantage over the Combat Gauze, as it can be left in the body, thereby limiting the potential need for reoperation.