ArticleSurgical innovation2014
Evaluation and treatment of gastric stimulator failure in patients with gastroparesis.
Article in Surgical innovation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Surgeon's Role in Gastric Electrical Stimulation Therapy for Gastroparesis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021Review
- Absorbable antibacterial envelope in the surgical management of Twiddler's syndrome in a patient with gastric electric stimulator: a case report.Digestive medicine research · 2020Article
- Endoscopic and Surgical Treatments for Gastroparesis: What to Do and Whom to Treat?Gastroenterology clinics of North America · 2020Review
- Gastric Electric Stimulation for Refractory Gastroparesis.Journal of clinical outcomes management : JCOM · 2019Article
- Impact of electrical stimulation of the stomach on gastric distension-induced emesis in the musk shrew.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2016Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study evaluates treatment of gastroparesis patients refractory to gastric electrical stimulation (GES) therapy with surgical replacement of the entire GES system. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Some patients who have symptomatic improvement with GES later develop recurrent symptoms. Some patients improve by simply altering pulse parameter settings. Others continue to have symptoms with maximized pulse parameters. For these patients, we have shown that surgical implantation of a new device and leads at a different gastric location will improve symptoms of gastroparesis.
methodsThis study evaluates 15 patients with recurrent symptoms after initial GES therapy who subsequently received a second GES system. Positive response to GES replacement therapy is evaluated by symptoms scores for vomiting, nausea, epigastric pain, early satiety, and bloating using a modified Likert score system, 0 to 4.
resultsTotal symptom scores improved for 12 of 15 patients with GES replacement surgery. Total score for the replacement group decreased from 17.3 ± 1.6 to 13.6 ± 3.7 with a difference of 3.6 (P value = .017). This score is compared with that of the control group with a preoperative symptom score of 15.8 ± 3.6 and postoperative score of 12.3 ± 3.5 with a difference of 3.5 (P value = .011). The control group showed a 20.3% decrease in mean total symptoms score, whereas the study group showed a 22.5% decrease in mean with an absolute reduction of 2.2.
conclusionReimplantation of a GES at a new gastric location should be considered a viable option for patients who have initially failed GES therapy for gastroparesis.
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.