ReviewJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2026
Fasting Versus Non-fasting Protocols Before Cardiac Catheterization Procedures: A Meta-analysis of Clinical Trials.
Review in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Recent trials suggest that liberalizing oral intake prior to cardiac catheterization procedures improves patient satisfaction and is as safe as the traditional practice of "nothing by mouth." We aimed to compare the outcomes of fasting and nonfasting protocols before such procedures. Methods: We searched PubMed and Cochrane Library until May 1, 2025, for clinical trials comparing fasting and nonfasting protocols for a variety of cardiac catheterization procedures. Outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, aspiration, hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, nausea/vomiting, contrast-induced nephropathy, and hypotension. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI were calculated using the inverse variance method, and quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Results: We included 9 trials comparing fasting and nonfasting protocols, with a total sample of 3646 patients. We found no significant differences between the 2 groups for mortality (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.55-3.36; Conclusions: We found that the nonfasting group had similar risk of complications as the fasting group, lending support to liberalizing oral intake prior to these procedures. Our findings provide impetus for standardized, evidence-based protocols in cardiac catheterization.
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.