Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29951784›Full record

SynthesisObesity surgery2018

Laparoscopic Greater Curvature Plication and Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Treatments for Obesity: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Short- and Mid-Term Results.

Sergio Barrichello, Mauricio Kazuyoshi Minata, Amador García Ruiz de Gordejuela, Wanderley Marques Bernardo, Thiago Ferreira de Souza, Manoel Galvão Neto, Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de Moura, Marco Aurélio Santo, Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de Moura

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Obesity surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty: From whence we came and where we are going.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2019
    Article
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Sergio BarrichelloGastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology Department, University of São Paulo, CEP, São Paulo, SP, 05403-900, Brazil. sebarrichello@hotmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-4105-3999
Mauricio Kazuyoshi MinataGastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology Department, University of São Paulo, CEP, São Paulo, SP, 05403-900, Brazil.
Amador García Ruiz de GordejuelaServei de Cirurgia General i de l'Aparell Digestiu, Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Barcelona, Spain.
Wanderley Marques BernardoGastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology Department, University of São Paulo, CEP, São Paulo, SP, 05403-900, Brazil.
Thiago Ferreira de SouzaGastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology Department, University of São Paulo, CEP, São Paulo, SP, 05403-900, Brazil.
Manoel Galvão NetoFlorida International University, Miami, USA.
Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de MouraGastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology Department, University of São Paulo, CEP, São Paulo, SP, 05403-900, Brazil.
Marco Aurélio SantoGastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology Department, University of São Paulo, CEP, São Paulo, SP, 05403-900, Brazil.
Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de MouraGastrointestinal Endoscopy Unit, Gastroenterology Department, University of São Paulo, CEP, São Paulo, SP, 05403-900, Brazil.
Universidade de São Paulo · BRBellvitge University Hospital · ESFlorida International University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic greater curvature plication (LGP) has recently emerged as a new bariatric procedure. This surgery provides gastric restriction without resection, which could potentially provide a lower risk alternative, with fewer complications. The real benefit of this technique in the short and long term is unknown. This systematic review aims to compare laparoscopic gastric plication and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for obesity treatment.

methodsClinical trials were identified in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, LILACS, BVS, SCOPUS, and CINAHL databases. Comparison of LGP and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) included hospital stay, operative time, loss of hunger feeling, body mass index loss (BMIL), percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL), complications, symptoms in the postoperative period, and comorbidity remission or improvement.

resultsThis systematic review search included 17,423 records. Eight studies were selected for meta-analysis. There is no difference in operative time, hospital stay, and complications. Patients in the SG group had improved loss of hunger feeling. BMIL was better in the SG group at 12 and 24 months [mean difference (MD) - 2.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 3.10 to - 1.28, and MD - 4.59, 95% CI - 5.55 to - 3.63, respectively]. SG showed improved %EWL compared with gastric plication in 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. However, no difference was found in %EWL long-term results (24 and 36 months). Patients who underwent LGP had more sialorrhea. SG showed better results in diabetes remission.

conclusionsSG showed improved weight loss when compared with LGP, with better satiety, fewer symptoms in the postoperative period, and improved diabetes remission.

Indexed as

Bariatric SurgeryGastrectomyLaparoscopyHumansLength of StayObesity, MorbidOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsTreatment OutcomeWeight LossBariatric surgical proceduresMeta-analysisObesitySystematic reviewWeight loss

Identifiers

PMID29951784
OpenAlexW2811195053

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.