Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26541724›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2016

Randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic greater curvature plication versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

V V Grubnik, O B Ospanov, K A Namaeva, O V Medvedev, M S Kresyun

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

V V GrubnikDepartment of Surgery, Odessa National Medical University, Odessa, Ukraine. uamelt@gmail.com.
O B OspanovDepartment of Endosurgery, The Astana Medical University, Astana, Kazakhstan.
K A NamaevaDepartment of Endosurgery, The Astana Medical University, Astana, Kazakhstan.
O V MedvedevDepartment of Surgery, Odessa National Medical University, Odessa, Ukraine.
M S KresyunDepartment of Surgery, Odessa National Medical University, Odessa, Ukraine.
Odessa National Medical University · UAAstana Medical University · KZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic greater curvature plication (LGCP) is a new restrictive bariatric procedure, which has a similar restrictive mechanism like laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) without potential risk of leak. Aim of the study was to compare 2-year outcomes of LSG and LGCP.

methodsMulticenter prospective randomized trial was started in 2010. A total of 54 patients with morbid obesity were allocated either to LGCP group (n = 25) or LSG group (n = 27). Main exclusion criteria were: ASA > III, age > 75 and BMI > 65 kg/m(2). There were 40 women and 12 men, and the mean age was 42.6 ± 6.8 years (range 35-62). Data on the operation time, complications, hospital stay, body mass index loss, percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL), loss of appetite and improvement in comorbidities were collected during the follow-up examinations.

resultsAll procedures were completed laparoscopically. The mean operative time was 92.0 ± 15 min for LSG and 73 ± 19 min for LGCP (p > 0.05). The mean hospital stay was 4.0 ± 1.9 days in the LSG group and 3.8 ± 1.7 days in LGCP group (p > 0.05). One year after surgery, the mean %EWL was 59.5 ± 15.4 % in LSG group and 45.8 ± 17 % in LGCP group (p > 0.05). After 2 years, mean %EWL was 78.9 ± 20 % in the LSG group and 42.4 ± 18 % in the LGCP group (p < 0.01). After 3 years, mean %EWL was 72.8 ± 22 in the LSG group and only 20.5 ± 23.9 in the LGCP group (p < 0.01). Loss of feeling of hunger after 2 years was 25 % in LGCP group and 76.9 % in the LSG group (p < 0.05). The comorbidities including diabetes, sleep apnea and hypertension were markedly improved in the both groups after surgery.

conclusionThe short-term outcomes demonstrated equal effectiveness of the both procedures, but 2-year follow-up showed that LGCP is worse than LSG as a restrictive procedure for weight loss.

Indexed as

Weight LossAdultAppetiteComorbidityFeasibility StudiesFemaleGastrectomyGastroplastyHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedObesity, MorbidOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsLaparoscopic greater curvature plicationLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomyMorbid obesity

Identifiers

PMID26541724
OpenAlexW2229983850

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.