ArticleBMC anesthesiology2025
Timing selection for sedated gastroscopy after SARS-CoV-2 infection: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSedated gastroscopy poses risks for patients with upper respiratory infections. The optimal timing for performing sedated gastroscopy in patients with acute SARS-CoV-2 infection is uncertain.
methodsWe retrospectively collected data from patients who underwent sedated gastroscopy at the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University between December 19th 2022 and January 20th 2023. The exposure variable was SARS-CoV-2 infection status, categorized as COVID-19-negative, two weeks post-COVID-19, and three weeks post-COVID-19. The primary outcome was gastroscopy failure, and the secondary outcomes included acute laryngitis, decreased patient satisfaction, and decreased endoscopist satisfaction. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection status and outcomes.
resultsAmong the 386 patients included, 98 were COVID-19-negative, 57 were two weeks post-COVID-19, and 231 were three weeks post-COVID-19. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that being two weeks post-COVID-19 significantly increased the risk of gastroscopy failure (adjusted OR: 2.17, 95% CI: 1.47-3.46, P < 0.001), acute laryngitis (adjusted OR: 6.21; 95% CI: 3.01-13.04; P < 0.001), and decreased patient satisfaction (adjusted OR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.39-4.02; P < 0.001) compared with COVID-19-negative status. No statistically significant difference was found in postoperative outcomes between three weeks post-COVID-19 and COVID-19-negative status.
conclusionsSedated gastroscopy three weeks post-COVID-19 may be safe.
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.