Why the study?
Most data on bedside ultrasound for evaluating gastric contents were from healthy volunteers, leaving its accuracy in high-risk patient populations unclear.
Does bedside ultrasound evaluation of gastric contents reduce the risk of pulmonary aspiration in patients undergoing general anesthesia?
Does bedside ultrasound evaluation of gastric contents reduce the risk of pulmonary aspiration in patients undergoing general anesthesia?
Bedside ultrasound is a promising non-invasive tool to evaluate gastric contents and guide clinical decision-making to prevent pulmonary aspiration during general anesthesia.
Bedside gastric ultrasound may refine aspiration risk assessment; leaves open routine adoption pending higher-level outcome trials.
Pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents is one of the most terrible complications following general anesthesia. It is important for patients to prevent this complication by obeying the preoperative fasting protocol strictly. At present, it has been reported by many studies that bedside ultrasound, as a non-invasive and convenient method, could be used to evaluate gastric contents qualitatively and quantitatively. With the advantages of reliability, accuracy and repeatability, it can greatly reduce the risk of aspiration and ensure patients' life security. But most of the data were acquired from the healthy volunteers. For the gastrointestinal disorder, the pregnant women, obesity, children, the elderly and diabetes patients, the accuracy and reliability of ultrasound to predict the risk of aspiration remains to be identified by more further studies. For these patients with increasing risk of aspiration, I-AIM (Indication, Acquisition, Interpretation, Medical decision-making) framework plays an important role in ensuring the safety of patients. It is crucial to make appropriate clinical decisions by evaluating the gastric contents with ultrasound.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: