ArticleAME case reports2026
Bronchoscopic lavage for pulmonary aspiration: a case series.
Article in AME case reports, 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: Pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents is a life-threatening complication during anesthesia. Although immediate interventions are recommended, the role of bronchoscopic lavage remains controversial due to theoretical concerns about disseminating contaminants and limited clinical evidence. Case Description: We present four illustrative cases of high-risk patients who underwent bronchoscopic lavage following large-volume aspiration of gastric fluid, solid material, or bile. All patients showed immediate improvement in oxygenation and reduction in airway pressure after bronchoscopic lavage, with a total of 250-700 mL of normal saline instilled into the affected lobar bronchi. None developed severe complications such as aspiration pneumonia, severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), or death. Notably, one patient with pre-existing lung injury due to necrotizing pancreatitis also recovered favorably. In the two patients with available follow-up imaging, there was no radiographic evidence of bronchoscopic lavage -induced consolidation or diffused contamination. Conclusions: Prompt bronchoscopic lavage may be beneficial following large-volume aspiration, potentially through reducing inflammatory mediators and mechanically clearing particulate matter. Despite limitations inherent to its retrospective design and small sample size, this case series supports the safety and clinical utility of bronchoscopic lavage in this setting. Further large-scale studies are warranted to confirm these findings and establish standardized treatment protocols.
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.