Trial reportObesity (Silver Spring, Md.)2011
Implantable gastric stimulator does not prevent the increase in plasma ghrelin levels that occurs with weight loss.
Trial report in Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.), 2011. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Updates on gastric electrical stimulation to treat obesity: Systematic review and future perspectives.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
unlabelledThe SHAPE (Screened Health Assessment and Pacer Evaluation) trial was a 24 month randomized multicenter placebo-controlled study to determine the efficacy of an implantable gastric stimulator (IGS) for weight loss. This report is an investigator-initiated sub-study at one site designed to assess whether IGS affects plasma levels of ghrelin and peptide YY (PYY). The device was implanted in all subjects but was activated in the TREATMENT group (n = 7, BMI = 41.5 ± 2.0 kg/m2) and remained inactive in the CONTROL (n = 6, BMI = 39.5 ± 1.7 kg/m2) during the first 12 months. IGS was activated in both groups during months 12-24. Fasting venous blood was drawn at months 0, 12, and 24 and an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was performed at month 12. Although there was no difference in weight loss at 6 months ( CONTROL: -6.6 ± 1.5% vs. TREATMENT: -6.2 ± 1.4%), at 24 months the CONTROL group exhibited weight gain from baseline (+2.2 ± 1.5%) that was significantly different from the weight loss in the TREATMENT group (-1.9 ± 1.4%; P < 0.05). At 12 months, fasting ghrelin was significantly increased (P < 0.05) in the TREATMENT group (285 ± 35 to 336 ± 35 pg/ml; weight change, -4.9 ± 1.4%), but not in the CONTROL (211 ± 36 to 208 ± 35 pg/ml; weight change, -3.4 ± 1.5%). No significant change was observed in postprandial suppression of plasma ghrelin or in fasting and postprandial PYY levels. In conclusion, IGS does not prevent the increase in fasting plasma ghrelin levels associated with weight loss. Further studies are needed to determine whether changes in technology can improve weight loss and maintenance, perhaps using gut hormones as biomarkers of possible efficacy.
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.