ArticleJournal of anesthesia2026
Gastric ultrasound assessment of gastric volume and related factors in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy under sedation.
Article in Journal of anesthesia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comment on "Gastric ultrasound assessment of gastric volume and related factors in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy under sedation".Journal of anesthesia · 2026Article
- Comment on Peng et al. "Gastric ultrasound assessment of gastric volume and related factors in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy under sedation".Journal of anesthesia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to explore the factors associated with a gastric volume (GV) > 0.8 mL/kg in anesthetized patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.
methodsPatients receiving sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy were enrolled. Gastric cross-sectional area (CSA) was measured using ultrasonography in both the supine and right lateral decubitus (RLD) positions. Actual GV was determined by measuring gastric contents aspirated during endoscopy. The primary outcome was the incidence of high-risk GV, defined as GV > 0.8 mL/kg.
resultsAmong 503 patients, the incidence of high-risk GV was 15.3%. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified diabetes (odds ratio [OR] = 5.743; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.040-16.166; P = 0.001), younger age (OR = 0.936; 95% CI: 0.908-0.964; P < 0.001), a last meal consisting of meat (OR = 16.150; 95% CI: 4.186-62.302; P < 0.001), BMI < 18.5 (OR = 9.386; 95% CI: 2.640-33.377; P = 0.001), RLD CSA (OR = 1.426; 95% CI: 1.283-1.584; P < 0.001), and Perlas score (OR = 4.025; 95% CI: 1.282-12.636; P = 0.017) as independent predictors of high-risk GV. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for RLD CSA in predicting high-risk GV was 0.861 (95% CI: 0.828-0.890, P < 0.001), with an optimal cutoff value of 5.32 cm
conclusionsDiabetes, younger age, consumption of meat as the last meal, BMI < 18.5 kg/m
Indexed as
Identifiers
42295434What 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.