ArticleObesity surgery2014
Parameter selection and stimulating effects of an adjustable gastric electrical stimulator in dogs.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implanted Closed-Loop Gastric Electrical Stimulation (CLGES) System with Sensor-Based Feedback Safely Limits Weight Regain at 24 Months.Obesity surgery · 2018Trial
- Effects of colonic electrical stimulation using different individual parameter patterns and stimulation sites on gastrointestinal transit time, defecation, and food intake.International journal of colorectal disease · 2016Article
- The acute effects of a new type of implantable gastric electrical stimulators featuring varied pulse widths on beagle dogs' food intake and gastric accommodation.Obesity surgery · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastric electrical stimulation (GES) has been proposed as a promising therapeutic option in treating obesity for 20 years. Currently, the available device of GES cannot meet the clinical needs. The purpose of this study is to verify the effect of a new type of adjustable gastric electrical stimulator in reducing food intake and body weight.
methodsEight beagle dogs randomly followed GES and sham GES for 3 months in a crossover design. Parameters were adjusted and individualized during the experiment. Symptoms of GES were recorded, and the effective parameters were selected. Resistance to GES was assessed. Food intake and body weight were measured to evaluate the effect of GES.
resultsThe effective parameters were varied among the dogs. Resistance to GES was observed in different periods in dogs. Parameters needed to be adjusted every 10.2 ± 2.1 days during the period of GES. Food intake during GES for 3 months was significantly reduced than that during sham GES of 3 months (P < 0.05). With the decreased food intake, body weight was significantly reduced by the end of GES of 3 months compared with that of sham GES of 3 months (P < 0.05).
conclusionsFood intake and body weight of dogs are significantly reduced by adjustable GES. Individual parameters and resistance during GES are required to be considered. The new adjustable device may have good prospects of clinical application for obesity.
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.