Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 825

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Safety of transesophageal echocardiography. A multicenter survey of 10,419 examinations.

Daniel, W G, Erbel, R, Kasper, W, Visser, C A, Engberding, R, Sutherland, G R, Grube, E, Hanrath, P, Maisch, B, Dennig, K·1991·Circulation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: During the past few years, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) has been increasingly used in clinical cardiology; data concerning the practicability and safety of the technique, however, are rare. METHODS AND RESULTS: This report analyzes the experience of 15 European centers performing TEE studies for at least 1 year. At the time of this survey, 10,419 TEE examinations had been attempted or performed in these institutions. These TEE examinations were carried out by 54 physicians, 53.7% of whom had been trained in endoscopic techniques. Within the same time period, 160,431 precordial echocardiographic examinations were performed in the 15 institutions; the ratio between TEE and transthoracic studies averaged 9.03 +/- 6.4% (range of the 15 centers, 1.4-23.6%). Of the 10,419 patients, 9,240 (88.7%) were conscious inpatients or outpatients at the time of the TEE examination; the vast majority of the conscious patients did not receive intravenous sedation before TEE. In 201 cases (1.9%), insertion of the TEE probe was unsuccessfully attempted because of a lack of patient cooperation and/or operator experience (98.5%) or because of anatomical reasons (1.5%). In 90 of 10,218 TEE studies (0.88%) with successful probe insertion, the examination had to be interrupted because of the patient's intolerance of the echoscope (65 cases); because of pulmonary (eight cases), cardiac (eight cases), or bleeding complications (two cases); or for other reasons (seven cases). One of the bleeding complications resulted from a malignant lung tumor with esophageal infiltration and was fatal (mortality rate, 0.0098%). CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter survey documents that TEE studies are associated with an acceptable low risk when used by experienced operators under proper safety conditions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.cir.83.3.817

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 825

Metadata

Authors
Daniel, W. G., Erbel, R., Kasper, W., Visser, C. A., Engberding, R., Sutherland, G. R., Grube, E., Hanrath, P., Maisch, B., & Dennig, K.
Venue
Circulation
Published
1991-03
Volume
83
Issue
3
Pages
817-821
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2051968895
Cited by
825
References
0
FWCI
33.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Safety of transesophageal echocardiography. A multicenter survey of 10,419 examinations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.83.3.817
The paper
Daniel, W. G., Erbel, R., Kasper, W., Visser, C. A., Engberding, R., Sutherland, G. R., Grube, E., Hanrath, P., Maisch, B., & Dennig, K. (1991). Safety of transesophageal echocardiography. A multicenter survey of 10,419 examinations. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.83.3.817

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.