ArticleObesity surgery2012
Management of gastric perforations during laparoscopic gastric banding.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is a one-step sleeve gastrectomy indicated as a revision procedure after gastric banding? Data analysis from a quality assurance study of the surgical treatment of obesity in Germany.Obesity surgery · 2014Article
- Complete endoscopic/transgastric retrieval of eroded gastric band: description of a novel technique and review of the literature.Surgical endoscopy · 2013Review
- "Management of gastric perforations during laparoscopic gastric banding" by Boris Kirshtein et al.Obesity surgery · 2013Article
- Esophageal perforation during laparoscopic adjustable gastric band: conversion to open sleeve gastrectomy and endoscopic stent placement.Il Giornale di chirurgiaArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastric perforations are one of the intraoperative complications of laparoscopic gastric banding (LAGB). Delayed diagnosis can increase the mortality and morbidity rates.
methodsRetrospective analysis of surgery outcome and long-term follow-up of the patients with gastric perforations during primary LAGB and revisional band procedures was performed.
resultsTwenty-four patients with gastric perforations were identified during 15 years of LAGB surgeries. Half of these had primary LAGB and half had revisional procedures (five emergent and seven elective). Gastric tear was found at surgery in 19 patients; the band was preserved and LAGB was completed in 18 of these. Five patients had delayed diagnosis and underwent re-exploration 24-72 h after surgery. During the surgery, 23 anterior, 8 posterior, 1 esophageal, and 1 small bowel tears were found. Laparoscopic repair was successful in 19 (83%) cases. The mean surgery time and mean hospital stay were 56.3 min and 7.8 days, respectively. Morbidity and mortality rates were 25 and 4.1%, respectively. Two patients underwent later band replacement following removal. Band erosion was observed in one patient. At least 17 patients had no complications during mean follow-up of 52.2 months.
conclusionsBand preservation is recommended following primary repair of gastric tear. Early intra- and postoperative diagnosis of gastric tear in LAGB is essential for successful management of this iatrogenic injury and decreases occurrence of complications.
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.