Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36272038›Full record

ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2023

Safety and Efficacy of Sedation During Emergency Endoscopy for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

Daisuke Yamaguchi, Goshi Nagatsuma, Yasuhisa Sakata, Yumi Mizuta, Tadahiro Nomura, Azuki Jinnouchi, Kasumi Gondo, Ryosuke Asahi, Satoshi Ishida, Shunichiro Kimura and 12 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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 · 2026
    Trial
  3. Endoscopic Treatment of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Diagnosis and Management of Esophagogastric Varices.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
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

22 authors.

Daisuke YamaguchiDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan. daisukehawks@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9782-9998
Goshi NagatsumaDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Yasuhisa SakataDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Saga University, Saga, 849-8501, Japan.
Yumi MizutaDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Tadahiro NomuraDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Azuki JinnouchiDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Kasumi GondoDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Ryosuke AsahiDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Satoshi IshidaDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Shunichiro KimuraDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Shun FujimotoDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Akane ShimakuraDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Amane JubashiDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Yuki TakeuchiDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Kei IkedaDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Yuichiro TanakaDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Wataru YoshiokaDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Naoyuki HinoDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Tomohito MorisakiDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Keisuke ArioDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Seiji TsunadaDepartment of Gastroenterology, National Hospital Organization Ureshino Medical Center, Ureshino, Japan.
Motohiro EsakiDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Saga University, Saga, 849-8501, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimThis study aimed to compare patients with and without sedation during emergency endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) and to clarify the safety and efficacy of sedation in emergency endoscopy.

methodsWe retrospectively collected 389 patients who underwent emergency endoscopy for UGIB at Ureshino Medical Center from 2016 to 2021. Patients were divided into two groups: sedation group during emergency endoscopy and nonsedation group. Clinical characteristics, patient status on admission, and UGIB etiology were evaluated. Treatment outcomes and adverse events were evaluated using propensity score matching (PSM), and risk factors for mortality from UGIB were investigated using Cox multivariate analysis.

resultsThe sedation group was significantly younger, composed of a higher proportion of males, and had chronic liver disease. Blood pressure and hemoglobin level on admission were significantly higher in the sedation group. The main cause of bleeding was peptic ulcer, which was significantly higher in the nonsedation group. PSM created 133 matched pairs. The success rate of endoscopic hemostasis was similar in both groups, and procedure time was significantly shorter in the sedation group than in the nonsedation group (17.6 ± 10.0 versus 20.2 ± 10.2 min, P = 0.04). There were no significant differences in adverse events between groups. Cox multivariate analyses revealed that red blood cell transfusion [hazard ratio (HR) 4.45, P < 0.02] and rebleeding (HR 3.30, P = 0.03) were associated with increased risk of 30-day mortality from UGIB.

conclusionsSedation reduced the procedure time during emergency endoscopy for UGIB. Sedation during emergency endoscopy for UGIB is acceptable for safe endoscopic procedures.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal HemorrhagePeptic UlcerEndoscopy, GastrointestinalHumansMalePropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesBleedingEmergency endoscopyMortalityPropensity score matchingSedation

Identifiers

PMID36272038
PMCPMC10102050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.