ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2016
Gastric Electrical Stimulation and Sacral Electrical Stimulation: A Long-Term Follow-Up Study of Dual-Device Treatment.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2016. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Robotic Setup Promises Consistent Effects of Multilocular Gastrointestinal Electrical Stimulation: First Results of a Porcine Study.European surgical research. Europaische chirurgische Forschung. Recherches chirurgicales europeennes · 2020Article
- Effectiveness of gastric electrical stimulation in gastroparesis: Results from a large prospectively collected database of national gastroparesis registries.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2019Article
- Five-fold Gastrointestinal Electrical Stimulation With Electromyography-based Activity Analysis: Towards Multilocular Theranostic Intestinal Implants.Journal of neurogastroenterology and motility · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThe objective of this study was to investigate sacral electrical stimulation (SES) and gastric electrical stimulation (GES) by comparing upper and lower gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) symptoms and quality of life, before treatment and in the long term after treatment. We hypothesized that dual-device treatment would greatly improve upper and lower gastrointestinal and genitourinary symptoms, as well as quality of life.
methodsFifty-four patients who underwent dual-device treatment (GES and SES) were enrolled in this study. Patients who had surpassed 24 months since the second-device insertion were included. Patients were evaluated before and after both devices were implanted and given a symptom questionnaire regarding their upper GI, lower GI, and GU symptoms and their quality of life.
resultsWith combined treatment, a statistically significant improvement was seen in upper GI, lower GI, and GU symptoms and quality of life. However, fecal incontinence and fecal urgency improvements did not reach statistical significance, likely due to the small sample size.
conclusionThe implantation of two stimulators appears to be safe and effective to improve patients' quality of life for those with upper GI symptoms, bowel problems, and bladder dysfunction.
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.