The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Validation of a Mathematical Model for Ultrasound Assessment of Gastric Volume by Gastroscopic Examination
Open accessAbstract
INTRODUCTION: Pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents is a serious perioperative complication. Previous models of ultrasound gastric volume assessment are preliminary and have not been validated by an external "gold standard." In the present study we propose a more accurate model based on prospective data obtained from 108 patients undergoing bedside gastric sonography and upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE). METHODS: Patients undergoing elective UGE were randomized to ingest one of 6 predetermined volumes of apple juice after an 8-hour fasting period. A cross-sectional area of the antrum in the right lateral decubitus position (Right lat CSA) was measured by a blinded sonographer following a standardized scanning protocol. Gastric fluid was subsequently suctioned under gastroscopic vision during UGE performed by a blinded gastroenterologist and measured to the nearest milliliter. RESULTS: Data from 108 patients suggest that a previously reported model tends to overestimate gastric volume particularly at low volume states. A new best fit mathematical model to predict gastric fluid volume based on measurements of Right lat CSA is presented. This new model built on a more accurate gold standard can be used to estimate gastric volumes from 0 to 500 mL, in nonpregnant adults with body mass index<40 kg/m2. CONCLUSIONS: We report a new prediction model to assess gastric fluid volume using standard 2-dimentional bedside ultrasound that has several advantages over previously reported models.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Van de Putte, P., Vernieuwe, L., Jerjir, A., Verschueren, L., Tacken, M., & Perlas, A. (2017) · British Journal of Anaesthesia · doi:10.1093/bja/aew435 · Cited by 176
Self-citationNersessian, R. S. F., da Silva, L. M., Carvalho, M. A. S., Silveira, S. Q., Abib, A. C. V., Bellicieri, F. N., Lima, H. O., Ho, A. M. ‐., Anjos, G. S., & Mizubuti, G. B. (2024) · Anaesthesia · doi:10.1111/anae.16454 · Cited by 69
Baettig, S. J., Filipovic, M. G., Hebeisen, M., Meierhans, R., & Ganter, M. T. (2023) · Anaesthesia · doi:10.1111/anae.16117 · Cited by 59
Popivanov, P., Irwin, R., Walsh, M., Leonard, M., & Tan, T. (2020) · International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia · doi:10.1016/j.ijoa.2019.07.010 · Cited by 40
Singh, M., Tuteja, A., Wong, D. T., Goel, A., Trivedi, A., Tomlinson, G., & Chan, V. (2019) · Anesthesia & Analgesia · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000004350 · Cited by 33
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Perlas, A., Mitsakakis, N., Liu, L., Cino, M., Haldipur, N., Davis, L., Cubillos, J., & Chan, V.
- Venue
- Anesthesia & Analgesia
- Published
- 2013-02
- Volume
- 116
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 357-363
- ISSN
- 0003-2999 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2136787960
- Cited by
- 439
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Validation of a Mathematical Model for Ultrasound Assessment of Gastric Volume by Gastroscopic Examination. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1213/ane.0b013e318274fc19
- The paper
- Perlas, A., Mitsakakis, N., Liu, L., Cino, M., Haldipur, N., Davis, L., Cubillos, J., & Chan, V. (2013). Validation of a Mathematical Model for Ultrasound Assessment of Gastric Volume by Gastroscopic Examination. Anesthesia & Analgesia. https://doi.org/10.1213/ane.0b013e318274fc19
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.