ArticleBMC cancer2025
Sedated and unsedated gastroscopy has no influence on the outcomes of patients with gastric cancer: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- High Prevalence of Patient Intolerance to Unsedated Esophagogastroduodenoscopy: A Cross-Sectional Study in a Portuguese Population.GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDifferent anesthetic drugs and techniques may affect survival outcomes for gastric cancer (GC) after surgery. In this study, we investigated the association between sedated and unsedated gastroscopy on survival outcomes in patients with GC after surgery.
methodsThis was a retrospective study of patients who were diagnosed with GC by gastroscopy and underwent gastrectomy from January 2013 to December 2017. They were grouped based on the examination modality: propofol-based sedated gastroscopy or unsedated gastroscopy. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline variables. Survival outcomes and distant metastases were compared between these two groups.
resultsFinally, 673 patients were enrolled, 160 in the sedated gastroscopy group and 513 in the unsedated gastroscopy group. After PSM, there were 160 patients in each group. There was no significant difference in overall survival outcomes in the sedated gastroscopy group compared to the unsedated gastroscopy group before PSM (HR = 0.761, 95% CI: 0.531-1.091, P = 0.139) or after PSM (HR = 0.874, 95% CI: 0.564-1.355, P = 0.547). There was no significant difference in the incidence of distant metastases between the two groups before PSM (16.9% vs. 20.7%, P = 0.294) or after PSM (16.9% vs. 23.8%, P = 0.126). To confirm that our patients behaved similarly to other studies, we performed a multivariate analysis and the results showed that sex, pathological TNM stage, Borrmann type, adjuvant treatment, and surgical resection range were all independent factors affecting survival outcomes in our patients.
conclusionOur results showed no significant difference in the effects of sedated gastroscopy vs. unsedated gastroscopy on survival outcomes or distant metastases of patients after gastrectomy for GC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.