ArticleObesity surgery2014
The acute effects of a new type of implantable gastric electrical stimulators featuring varied pulse widths on beagle dogs' food intake and gastric accommodation.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- abiliti Closed-Loop Gastric Electrical Stimulation System for Treatment of Obesity: Clinical Results with a 27-Month Follow-Up.Obesity surgery · 2015Observational
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo improve the therapeutic effects of gastric electrical stimulation (GES) for obesity, an animal experiment was conducted using a new type of stimulators. Proper parameters of GES were selected, and the impacts of GES on the food intake and gastric accommodation of canines were observed.
methodsEight beagle dogs were operated on, and GES was performed on them. Firstly, GES was performed to determine the right parameters according to symptoms. Secondly, the so selected parameters were used in a 3-day GES procedure, during which process food intake, body weight, and symptoms were recorded. Thirdly, the gastric capacities before and after GES with different pulse widths were measured by means of a barostat.
resultsThe selected parameters varied for each dog, with the pulse widths ranging from 0.3 to 6 ms. The food consumption after GES dropped significantly as compared with the amount observed in the sham stimulation. Tolerance to stimulation could be observed during GES. The post-GES gastric fundus capacity increased evidently in comparison with the capacity before GES, suggesting significant distention as compared with sham stimulation. Given an increment of 2 ms in the pulse width twice, the gastric capacity continued to distend each time.
conclusionsGES featuring pulse trains with wider and individualized pulse widths could inhibit food consumption of dogs. The stimulation parameters should be selected individually and adjusted periodically. GES of this mode could also increase the fasting gastric capacity with certain dose-related effects. The new type of stimulators may be more suitable for the treatment of human obesity than traditional stimulators.
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.