ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Case Report: Esophageal balloon occlusion with a Foley catheter in high-risk sedated gastroscopy.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Patients with altered upper gastrointestinal anatomy (such as after proximal gastrectomy) face a significantly elevated risk of gastro-esophageal reflux and pulmonary aspiration during sedated endoscopy. There is a need for safe sedation strategies in these high-risk cases. Case presentation: We describe a 56-year-old male with a history of proximal gastrectomy and chronic reflux who required an upper endoscopy under sedation. To mitigate aspiration risk, an 18-Fr Foley catheter with an inflatable cuff was inserted transnasally into the mid-esophagus under light sedation and local anesthesia, and the balloon was inflated with 20 ml saline to occlude the esophageal lumen. The catheter's drainage port was connected to wall suction at a negative pressure of approximately -20KPa to aspirate any refluxate below the occlusion. After deepening sedation (MOAA/S score ≤ 2) with propofol and alfentanil (without endotracheal intubation), the endoscopy was performed while the esophageal balloon was gradually deflated under direct visualization. No obvious reflux or escape of gastric contents was observed during controlled deflation. The 8-min procedure was completed without hypoxemia, coughing, or any signs of aspiration, and the patient recovered without complications. Conclusion: This case suggests that the use of esophageal balloon occlusion with negative-pressure suction was associated with safe, uneventful deep sedation in a patient at high risk of aspiration. The technique may serve as a simple, minimally invasive alternative to endotracheal intubation or awake endoscopy for airway protection in such high-risk patients, though further evaluation in larger studies is warranted.
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.