Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27068119›Full record

Observational studyScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2016

Acute emergency care and airway management of caustic ingestion in adults: single center observational study.

Manuel F Struck, André Beilicke, Albrecht Hoffmeister, Ines Gockel, André Gries, Hermann Wrigge, Michael Bernhard

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Short-term and long-term management of caustic-induced gastrointestinal injury: An evidence-based practice guidelines.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2025
    Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Manuel F StruckDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. manuelstruck@web.de.
André BeilickeDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Albrecht HoffmeisterDepartment of Gastroenterology and Rheumatology, Section of Interdisciplinary Endoscopy and Sonography, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Ines GockelDepartment of Visceral, Transplant, Thoracic and Vascular Surgery, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
André GriesEmergency Department, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Hermann WriggeDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Michael BernhardEmergency Department, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCaustic ingestions are rare but potentially life-threatening events requiring multidisciplinary emergency approaches. Although particularly respiratory functions may be impaired after caustic ingestions, studies involving acute emergency care are scarce. The goal of this study was to explore acute emergency care with respect to airway management and emergency department (ED) infrastructures.

methodsWe retrospectively evaluated adult patients after caustic ingestions admitted to our university hospital over a 10-year period (2005-2014). Prognostic analysis included age, morbidity, ingested agent, airway management, interventions (endoscopy findings, computed tomography (CT), surgical procedures), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, length of stay in hospital and hospital mortality.

resultsTwenty-eight patients with caustic ingestions were included in the analysis of which 18 (64%) had suicidal intentions. Ingested agents were caustic alkalis (n = 22; 79%) and acids (n = 6; 21%). ICU admission was required in 20 patients (71%). Fourteen patients (50%) underwent tracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation, of which 3 (21%) presented with difficult airways. Seven patients (25%) underwent tracheotomy including one requiring awake tracheotomy due to progressive upper airway obstruction. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) was performed in 21 patients (75%) and 11 (39%) underwent CT examination. Five patients (18%) required emergency surgery with a mortality of 60%. Overall hospital mortality was 18% whereas the need for tracheal intubation (P = 0.012), CT-diagnostic (P = 0.001), higher EGD score (P = 0.006), tracheotomy (P = 0.048), and surgical interventions (P = 0.005) were significantly associated with mortality.

conclusionsCaustic ingestions in adult patients require an ED infrastructure providing 24/7-availability of expertise in establishing emergent airway safety, endoscopic examination (EGD and bronchoscopy), and CT diagnostic, intensive care and emergency esophageal surgery. We recommend that - even in patients with apparently stable clinical conditions - careful monitoring of respiratory functions should be considered as long as diagnostic work-up is completed.

Indexed as

Critical CareDrinkingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAirway ManagementCausticsEmergency Service, HospitalEndoscopy, Digestive SystemFemaleHumansMaleMedical AuditMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSurgical Procedures, OperativeCausticsAirway managementCaustic ingestionEmergency managementEndoscopic managementIntoxication

Identifiers

PMID27068119
PMCPMC4827211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.