SynthesisObesity surgery2015
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Greater Curvature Plication and Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Obesity surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopic Greater Curvature Plication and Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Treatments for Obesity: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Short- and Mid-Term Results.Obesity surgery · 2018Pooled it
- Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Greater Curvature Plication and Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Critical Appraisal of the Role of Gastric Plication in Bariatric Surgery.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Clinical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Greater Curvature Plication and Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Case-Matched Control Study.Obesity surgery · 2019Article
- Greater Curvature Plication with Duodenal-Jejunal Bypass: a Novel Metabolic Surgery for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.Obesity surgery · 2018Article
- Comparison of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy and Laparoscopic Greater Curvature Plication Regarding Efficacy and Safety: a Meta-Analysis.Obesity surgery · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laparoscopic greater curvature plication (LGCP) is considered to have evolved from less invasive laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). In the present meta-analysis, we compared these two procedures in terms of efficacy and safety. We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from database inception until April 2015. Excess weight loss (%EWL), resolution of obesity-related comorbidities, adverse events, operation time, and postoperative hospital stay were evaluated using the software Review Manager 5.3. The following four studies were eligible for inclusion: one randomized controlled trial and three non-randomized controlled trials involving 299 patients. Our meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly greater %EWL after LSG than LGCP at the follow-up time points of 3 months (Z = 2.26, p = 0.02), 6 months (Z = 4.49, p < 0.00001), and 12 months (Z = 6.99, p < 0.00001). The difference in the resolution of diabetes mellitus between these two approaches did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.66). According to the pooled data, LGCP was associated with more adverse events than was LSG (p = 0.01). The operation time (p = 0.54) and postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.44) were comparable between the two groups. LGCP is inferior to LSG not only in terms of providing effective weight loss but also in terms of safety.
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.