SynthesisPloS one2017
CO2 insufflation versus air insufflation for endoscopic submucosal dissection: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Carbonated soft drink for gastric preparation for magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy: An open-label randomized controlled trial.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Trial
- Uncommon cause of increased end-tidal carbon dioxide during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography under sedation.Indian journal of anaesthesia · 2025Article
- Intraoperative hypothermia in patients with laparoscopic surgery: Influencing factors and prevention strategies.Heliyon · 2024Article
- A novel technique for endoscope progression in gastroscopy resection: forward-return way for dissection of stromal tumor in the muscularis propria of the gastric fundus.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Endoscopic Esophageal Submucosal Tunnel Dissection for Cystic Lesions Originating from the Muscularis Propria of the Gastric Cardia.Journal of oncology · 2020Article
- Commentary on "Efficacy of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of Esophageal Neoplasms under General Anesthesia".Clinical endoscopy · 2019Article
- Carbon dioxide insufflation reduces residual gas in the gastrointestinal tract following colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection.Biomedical reports · 2018Article
- Carbon Dioxide Insufflation in Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: Is It an Urgent Need?Clinical endoscopy · 2017Article
- Diffuse Subcutaneous Emphysema, Pneumomediastinum, and Pneumothorax following Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Hysterectomy.Case reports in emergency medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCarbon dioxide (CO2) insufflation is increasingly used for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) owing to the faster absorption of CO2 as compared to that of air. Studies comparing CO2 insufflation and air insufflation have reported conflicting results.
objectivesThis meta-analysis is aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of use of CO2 insufflation for ESD.
methodsClinical trials of CO2 insufflation versus air insufflation for ESD were searched in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database. We performed a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
resultsEleven studies which compared the use of CO2 insufflation and air insufflation, with a combined study population of 1026 patients, were included in the meta-analysis (n = 506 for CO2 insufflation; n = 522 for air insufflation). Abdominal pain and VAS scores at 6h and 24h post-procedure in the CO2 insufflation group were significantly lower than those in the air insufflation group, but not at 1h and 3h after ESD. The percentage of patients who experienced pain 1h and 24h post-procedure was obviously decreased. Use of CO2 insufflation was associated with lower VAS scores for abdominal distention at 1h after ESD, but not at 24h after ESD. However, no significant differences were observed with respect to postoperative transcutaneous partial pressure carbon dioxide (PtcCO2), arterial blood carbon dioxide partial pressure (PaCO2), oxygen saturation (SpO2%), abdominal circumference, hospital stay, white blood cell (WBC) counts, C-Reactive protein (CRP) level, dosage of sedatives used, incidence of dysphagia and other complications.
conclusionUse of CO2 insufflation for ESD was safe and effective with regard to abdominal discomfort, procedure time, and the residual gas volume. However, there appeared no significant differences with respect to other parameters namely, PtcCO2, PaCO2, SpO2%, abdominal circumference, hospital stay, sedation dosage, complications, WBC, CRP, and dysphagia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.