ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Monitoring the Depth of Sedation During Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Narrative Review of Current Evidence and Clinical Recommendations.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sedation and anesthesia are integral components of modern gastrointestinal endoscopy, enhancing patient comfort and procedural success while adding risks such as respiratory and cardiovascular complications. Accurate monitoring of sedation depth is essential to balance safety and procedural efficacy. This narrative literature review synthesizes current evidence on monitoring depth of anesthesia during endoscopic procedures, including clinical assessment scales, capnography, and processed electroencephalogram (pEEG)-based technologies. The effects of commonly used sedative agents on monitoring parameters and the impact of different monitoring strategies on clinical outcomes are also discussed. Current evidence indicates that clinical assessment remains the cornerstone of monitoring during moderate sedation, while capnography improves early detection of respiratory compromise during deep sedation. pEEG-based monitoring may provide additional value in selected high-risk or prolonged procedures but should complement, not replace, clinical evaluation. A multimodal monitoring approach tailored to sedation depth and patient risk profile is likely to be the most effective strategy for optimizing patient safety. Future research should focus on standardizing monitoring protocols and identifying populations most likely to benefit from advanced monitoring techniques.
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.