ArticleJournal of perioperative practice2025
Gastric ultrasound: Enhancing preoperative risk assessment and patient safety.
Article in Journal of perioperative practice, 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.
- Enhancing gastric ultrasound training with standardized patient-based drinking simulation: a self-controlled study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Perioperative pulmonary aspiration is a critical complication linked to significant morbidity and mortality, particularly in high-risk populations such as patients with diabetes, obesity, gastroparesis, or those using Glucagon-Like-Peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs). Standard fasting protocols may not be appropriate for these patients, as they have increased propensity of delayed gastric emptying, hence increasing the complex of the preoperative risk assessment. Gastric ultrasound (GUS) provides a non-invasive, reliable method for assessing gastric content and volume, enabling anaesthesia professionals to make informed decisions regarding aspiration risk, airway management, and surgical scheduling. By identifying patients with elevated gastric volumes, GUS has the potential to reduce aspiration-related complications and unnecessary surgical cancellations.Despite its clear clinical benefits, the adoption of GUS in anaesthetic practice remains limited, primarily due to the technical skill required for accurate quantitative assessments. Qualitative evaluations of gastric contents are simpler for beginners, but precise volume measurements, essential for risk stratification, demand more extensive training. Recent studies demonstrate that with structured training, even novice operators can achieve high diagnostic accuracy. Artificial intelligence (AI) can further enhance GUS utility by automating volume calculations, guiding probe placement, and providing real-time feedback. These capabilities could significantly shorten the learning curve and improve consistency in risk assessment.Incorporating GUS and AI tools into anaesthesia training can overcome adoption barriers, enabling clinicians to more accurately assess aspiration risk and enhance patient safety in perioperative care.
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.