SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2025
Clinical features and risk factors for colorectal gas explosion during digestive endoscopy and surgery: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding: An Update and a Practical Diagnostic Approach.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsColorectal gas explosion (CGE) is an exceptional but potentially fatal complication of digestive endoscopy or surgery. The role played by bowel preparations and endoscopic or surgical devices in the risk of CGE is still unclear. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify risk factors for CGE.
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive literature search of multiple databases from inception to September 16, 2024 including all reports of CGE according to a systematic review protocol preregistered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42023455049). Additionally, we analyzed all trials that measured explosive gas levels after different bowel preparation strategies.
resultsTwenty-nine case reports, three case series, and eleven trials were included. Thirty-six cases of CGE were described, 12 surgical and 24 endoscopic. Perforation and death following CGE occurred in 81% and 14% of patients, respectively. The most common bowel preparations taken before CGE were enemas (42%) and oral preparations (31%), while 28% of patients did not undergo any bowel preparation. Bowel preparation was reported as inadequate in most CGE (solid stool in 65% and poor in 11%). The most frequent devices that triggered CGE were argon plasma coagulation during endoscopy (58%) and the electric scalpel during surgical procedures (75%). Published trials showed that adequate bowel preparation, together with endoscopic insufflation and suction, reduces intestinal levels of hydrogen and methane.
conclusionsCGE predominantly occurs in patients undergoing interventional procedures with inadequate bowel preparation. Achieving optimal bowel preparation, together with endoscopic aspiration, washing, and CO
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.