ArticleAnnals of surgical innovation and research2016
Novel treatments for complications after bariatric surgery.
Article in Annals of surgical innovation and research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Weight Regain after Metabolic Surgery: Beyond the Surgical Failure.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Safety and Efficacy of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) Used for Analgesia After Bariatric Surgery: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.Obesity surgery · 2019Article
- [Endoscopic treatment of obesity and complications following bariatric surgery].Der Internist · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bariatric surgery has been considered one of best treatments for obesity. As every surgical procedure-and any medical intervention, it is not exempt of complications, among which leaks, strictures, acute hemorrhages and fistulae highlight. Leaks are more common in the gastro-jejunal anastomosis (GJA) in the case of Roux-en-y Gastric Bypass (RYGB), while in Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG) they locate in the stapler line. Stenosis can be seen in the gastro-jejunostomy in the RYGB and in the gastric tube in case of the LSG. For each of these complications, many innovative solutions have been developed, including new surgical devices. In spite of promising good results, evidence regarding utility and safeness of these technologies is still scarce. Self-expandable endoscopic stents have been used to treat leaks, with an overall success rate of 80-90 % and a migration rate of 15-35 %. The bear trap-like over-the-scope (Ovesco) clips have been used to treat GI hemorrhages, leaks and even fistulae, with a 70-80 % success rate, although more endoscopic sessions may be needed. Overstitch, an endosurgical suture devices, have been used to treat leaks, fistulae and perforations. Overall, technical success achievement approaches to 90 %, while clinical success ranges from 80 to 90 %, except for leaks closure, where a lower success rate has been observed. Despite of all of these advances, early diagnosis and treatment remains the main strategy to achieve success. In summary, novel therapies for complication management can be very useful, though further studies with larger series are still needed in order to confirm their efficacy and safeness.
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.