Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35262904›Full record

SynthesisDigestive diseases and sciences2022

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-Associated Infections: Update on an Emerging Issue.

Anasua Deb, Abhilash Perisetti, Hemant Goyal, Mark M Aloysius, Sonali Sachdeva, Dushyant Dahiya, Neil Sharma, Nirav Thosani

Erratum issued 3 registry-linked trialsAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 29 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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.

NCT06581016 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Performance Characteristics and Technical Outcomes of Single-use Versus Reusable Gastroscopes Evaluated in the Operating Room in Acute, Subacute and Elective Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorZealand University HospitalRan2024 to 2026Enrolled700ConditionsUpper Gastrointestinal DisorderArmsAmbu aScope Gastro, Ambu aScope Gastro Large, Diagnostic gastroscopes, Olympus, Therapeutic gastroscopes, Olympus
NCT06771102 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Performance Characteristics and Technical Outcomes of Single-use Gastroscopes Used Bedside Versus Reusable Gastroscopes Used in the Endoscopy Unit Evaluated in Subacute Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorZealand University HospitalRan2025 to 2027Enrolled180ConditionsUpper Gastrointestinal DisorderArmsAmbu aScope Gastro, Diagnostic gastroscopes, Olympus
NCT07727226 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Endoscopists' Perspectives on the Use of Single-Use Gastroscopes in Elective and Subacute Patients in the Endoscopy Unit

TypeinterventionalSponsorZealand University HospitalRan2026 to 2027Enrolled300ConditionsUpper Gastrointestinal DisorderArmsAmbu aScope Gastro, Reusable diagnostic gastroscopes (Olympus)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Risks of GI endoscopy in cancer patients with neutropenia and thrombocytopenia.Frontiers in gastroenterology (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Tolerance ofBiofilm · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Role of single-use gastroscopes in advanced endoscopy.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2024
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Anasua Deb *Department of Internal Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, TX, 79430, USA.
Abhilash Perisetti *Advance Endoscopy, Interventional Oncology & Surgical Endoscopy (IOSE), Parkview Cancer Institute, 11050 Parkview Circle, Fort Wayne, IN, 46845, USA.
Hemant Goyal *The Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education, 501 S. Washington Avenue, Scranton, PA, 18503, USA. goyalh@thewrightcenter.org.ORCID 0000-0002-9433-9042
Mark M AloysiusDepartment of Internal Medicine, The Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education, 501 S. Washington Avenue, Scranton, PA, 18505, USA.
Sonali SachdevaDepartment of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Dushyant DahiyaCentral Michigan University College of Medicine, 1000 Houghton Ave, Saginaw, MI, 48603, USA.
Neil SharmaDivision of Interventional Oncology & Surgical Endoscopy (IOSE), Parkview Cancer Institute, 11050 Parkview Circle, Fort Wayne, IN, 46845, USA.
Nirav ThosaniDivision of Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition, Center for Interventional Gastroenterology at UTHealth (iGUT), Atilla Ertan MD Chair in Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition, McGovern Medical School, UTHealth, Houston, USA.
Parkview Health · USThe Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education · USBoston University · USCentral Michigan University · USTexas Tech University · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over 17.7 million gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures are performed annually, contributing to 68% of all endoscopic procedures in the United States. Usually, endoscopic procedures are low risk, but adverse events may occur, including cardiopulmonary complications, bleeding, perforation, pancreatitis, cholangitis, and infection. Infections after the GI endoscopies most commonly result from the patient's endogenous gut flora. Although many studies have reported infection after GI endoscopic procedures, a true estimate of the incidence rate of post-endoscopy infection is lacking. In addition, the infection profile and causative organisms have evolved over time. In recent times, multi-drug-resistant microorganisms have emerged as a cause of outbreaks of endoscope-associated infections (EAI). In addition, lapses in endoscope reprocessing have been reported, with some but not all outbreaks in recent times. This systematic review summarizes the demographical, clinical, and management data of EAI events reported in the literature. A total of 117 articles were included in the systematic review, with the majority reported from North America and Western Europe. The composite infection rate was calculated to be 0.2% following GI endoscopic procedures, 0.8% following ERCP, 0.123% following non-ERCP upper GI endoscopic procedures, and 0.073% following lower GI endoscopic procedures. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most common culprit organism, followed by other Enterobacteriaceae groups of organisms and Gram-positive cocci. We have also elaborated different prevention methods such as antimicrobial prophylaxis, adequate sterilization methods for reprocessing endoscopes, periodic surveillance, and current evidence supporting their utilization. Finally, we discuss disposable endoscopes, which could be an alternative to reprocessing to minimize the chances of EAIs with their effects on the environmental and financial situation.

Indexed as

Communicable DiseasesEndoscopy, GastrointestinalCholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeDisease OutbreaksEndoscopesEnterobacteriaceaeEuropeHumansAntibiotic prophyalxisContaminationDuodenoscopyEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographyEndoscopy, colonoscopyEsophagogastroduodenoscopyInfectionInfectionsTransmission

Identifiers

PMID35262904
OpenAlexW4221077419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.