Observational studyBrazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)
Reinforcing the valuable role of gastric ultrasound for volume and content assessment: an observational study.
Observational study in Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of residual gastric volume by ultrasound prior to upper endoscopy: a prospective cohort study.Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie · 2025Article
- Diagnostic performance of ultrasound in the assessment of gastric contents: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Insights into imaging · 2024Review
- Effects of ultrasound monitoring of gastric residual volume on feeding complications, caloric intake and prognosis of patients with severe mechanical ventilation.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023Article
- Point-of-Care Ultrasound for the Trauma Anesthesiologist.Current anesthesiology reports · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary aspiration is one of the most important complications in anesthesiology. Assessment of gastric content by ultrasound is a good method to quantify gastric volume and to determine the risk of intraoperative pulmonary aspiration. The aim of this study is to determine the accuracy of the gastric ultrasonography in the qualitative analysis of gastric content, mainly in the analysis of small amounts of liquid content.
methodsGastric ultrasound was performed to 36 patients before upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGI), making two longitudinal scans at the epigastric level, one in supine position and the other in right lateral decubitus position, measuring two diameters and the area of the gastric antrum and assessing the content characteristics determining whether it was an empty stomach or contained fluid or solid content. Subsequently, the ultrasound findings were compared with UGI findings.
resultsGastric areas were analyzed by the trace and the lengths of the craniocaudal and anteroposterior axes concluding that there are no significant differences between the two methods. No statistically significant difference was found between UGI and US assessment technics. No statistically significant difference was found between the estimated volume by UGI and US.
conclusionsThough our study has some limitations, qualitative analysis of gastric content using ultrasound followed by endoscopy enabled the conclusion that there are no differences in the qualitative assessment regarding these two techniques, supporting the important role of point-of-care gastric ultrasound (POCGUS) in the assessment of pulmonary aspiration risk by the anesthesiologist in the perioperative period.
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.