ArticleBMC gastroenterology2017
Comparison of sedation between the endoscopy room and operation room during endoscopic submucosal dissection for neoplasms in the upper gastrointestinal tract.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and Recovery of Remimazolam Versus Midazolam in Sedated Colonoscopy: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial in Japan.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026Trial
- Efficacy and recovery of remimazolam versus midazolam in sedated upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a multicenter randomized controlled trial in Japan (RECOVER Study).Journal of gastroenterology · 2026Trial
- ED95 of Ciprofol Combined with Esketamine or Sufentanil in Elderly Patients Undergoing Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Dose-Finding and Randomized Controlled Trial.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Trial
- Usefulness of discharge standards in outpatients undergoing sedative endoscopy: a propensity score-matched study of the modified post-anesthetic discharge scoring system and the modified Aldrete score.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Article
- Clinical Outcomes and Adverse Events of Gastric Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection of the Mid to Upper Stomach under General Anesthesia and Monitored Anesthetic Care.Clinical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Airway Management for Initial PEG Insertion in the Pediatric Endoscopy Unit: A Retrospective Evaluation of 168 Patients.Pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology & nutrition · 2021Article
- Colorectal endoscopic mucosal resection with submucosal injection of epinephrine versus hypertonic saline in patients taking antithrombotic agents: propensity-score-matching analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Propofol sedation without endotracheal intubation is safe for endoscopic submucosal dissection in the esophagus and stomach.United European gastroenterology journal · 2019Observational
- Lower Rebleeding Rate after Endoscopic Band Ligation than Endoscopic Clipping of the Same Colonic Diverticular Hemorrhagic Lesion: A Historical Multicenter Trial in Saga, Japan.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe present study was performed to compare the safety of sedation during endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the endoscopy room versus operation room.
methodsIn total, 297 patients with gastrointestinal tumors who underwent ESD from January 2011 to December 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent ESD in the endoscopy room without propofol (Group E) versus operation room with propofol (Group O). The patient, tumor, and procedure characteristics; adverse events; and treatment outcomes were compared between the two groups.
resultsThe patient and tumor characteristics, including age (73.6 ± 8.2 vs. 72.5 ± 9.1 years), comorbidities, and tumor size and histology, were not different between Groups E and O. The ESD procedure time was comparable between Groups E and O (105.4 ± 70.4 vs. 106.5 ± 64.4 min), and the anesthesia time was equivalent (138.3 ± 78.1 vs. 148.4 ± 68.8 min). There were no significant differences in adverse events between the two groups. During the ESD procedure, desaturation occurred significantly more often in Group E than O (12.9% vs. 4.0%, P = 0.021, odds ratio: 3.53, 95% CI: 1.17-14.4). The recovery time after ESD was significantly longer in Group E than O (180 (100-360) vs. 90 (0-180) min, P < 0.001).
conclusionsA decreased desaturation rate and shorter recovery time after ESD were the advantages of sedation in the operation room with propofol compared with sedation in the endoscopy room. These findings warrant further exploration of the advantages of safe and effective ESD for upper gastrointestinal neoplasms in the operation room.
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.