ArticleGE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology2024
Quality Standards in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: Can Deep Sedation Influence It?
Article in GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology, 2024. 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.
- The impact of photographic image quantity on early upper gastrointestinal cancer detection during esophagogastroduodenoscopy.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Glycoproteomics of Gastrointestinal Cancers and Its Use in Clinical Diagnostics.Journal of proteome research · 2025Review
- Association between Examination Time and Discomfort in Unsedated Esophagogastroduodenoscopy: A Prospective Observational Study.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterologyArticle
- High Prevalence of Patient Intolerance to Unsedated Esophagogastroduodenoscopy: A Cross-Sectional Study in a Portuguese Population.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: According to the guideline published by ESGE/UEG, a high-quality esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) implies the application of some criteria that enable better healthcare outcomes. Although intra-procedural performance measures are dependent on patient factors, there is no reference to sedation practices in the guideline mentioned above. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate whether deep sedation influences EGD performance measures established by ESGE/UEG. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study, with a prospective enrollment, that considered for inclusion consecutive patients referred for EGD. Two questionnaires were used to assess performance measures and patient satisfaction after EGD. Results: Sedation had a statistically significant impact on most quality indicators, including complete examination (77.2% without sedation vs. 97.8% with sedation), inspection time (6.17 ± 3.45 vs. 8.39 ± 2.67 min), photodocumentation (78% vs. 97.8%), biopsies (39.3% vs. 60.7%), and patient satisfaction (5.42 ± 2.93 vs. 9.1 ± 1.19). The main reason for an incomplete procedure was patient intolerance (82.6%). Discussion: Deep sedation of patients submitted to EGD proved to be a determinant in the applicability of the ESGE/UEG quality indicators. Patient intolerance was eliminated in the group with sedation, enhancing procedure completeness, adequate pathology identification, management, and consequently, the effectiveness of the exam. Conclusion: Sedation administration should be considered in patients undergoing EGD since it ensures a high-quality procedure.
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.