ReviewTranslational gastroenterology and hepatology2026
Emphysematous gastritis: a systematic review of reported cases exploring predictors of mortality.
Review in Translational gastroenterology and hepatology, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Emphysematous gastritis (EG) is a rare but life-threatening condition caused by gas-forming bacterial infection of the gastric wall. The rarity of this disease has resulted in limited consolidated data, making it essential to review reported cases to identify clinical predictors of mortality. This systematic review synthesizes current evidence on EG, focusing on epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnostic modalities, treatment strategies, and factors associated with mortality. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus from inception to November 15, 2024, to identify published case reports and case series of adults diagnosed with EG. Extracted data included demographics, clinical presentation, laboratory findings, imaging modalities, endoscopic evaluation, therapeutic approaches, and reported complications. Descriptive analyses were first performed to characterize the clinical, diagnostic, and management patterns of EG across reported cases. The primary outcome of interest was mortality, and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to identify independent predictors of death. This review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42025630471). Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist. A total of 180 articles describing 189 cases were included. Results: A total of 189 cases of EG were identified, with a mean age of 61.7 years and a male predominance (62.4%). Common symptoms included gastric pain (78.3%), vomiting (59.8%), and hematemesis (23.8%). Computed tomography (CT) imaging was the primary diagnostic tool (89.9%), and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) was performed in 49.7% of cases. Treatment included antibiotics (76.0%), nasogastric decompression (26.7%), total parenteral nutrition (TPN) (10.6%), and surgical intervention (28.0%). The overall mortality rate was 26.9%. Alcohol use [odds ratio (OR): 4.16, P=0.02], chemotherapy (OR: 5.60, P=0.003), and gastric perforation (OR: 6.59, P<0.001) significantly increased mortality, while EGD was associated with reduced mortality (OR: 0.44, P=0.02) and lower risk of gastric perforation (OR: 0.08, P<0.01). Conclusions: EG is a rare condition with high mortality. Alcohol use, chemotherapy, and gastric perforation are associated with a higher risk of death, while EGD appears safe. Early recognition, CT diagnosis, and timely supportive care remain central to management.
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.