Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29974139›Full record

ReviewDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2018

[Will laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy continue to exist as a stand-alone procedure? : A procedure critical perspective].

A Dietrich

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

A DietrichKlinik u. Poliklinik für Visceral‑, Transplantations‑, Thorax- u. Gefäßchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Deutschland. arne.dietrich@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSleeve gastrectomy is currently the most frequently performed bariatric procedure worldwide; however, with respect to a certain need for revisional surgery (due to reflux disease or weight regain) there is an ongoing discussion about the value of sleeve gastrectomy in terms of a stand-alone procedure.

objectiveThe aim of this article is to critically discuss whether sleeve gastrectomy can still be considered a stand-alone procedure. MATERIAL AND

methodsThe current literature was searched for results after sleeve gastrectomy and the recommendations regarding this procedure are discussed.

resultsCurrently approximately 50% of primary bariatric procedures are sleeve gastrectomies, which has become a well-established stand-alone procedure. Sleeve gastrectomy leads to good mid-term results; however, the results of the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass are comparatively superior in terms of type 2 diabetes remission, control of preexisting or de novo reflux disease and weight loss. The mortality is comparable; however, the morbidity is lower after sleeve gastrectomy but there is a relevant rate of fistulas of the stapler suture.

conclusionPatients considered for sleeve gastrectomy must be informed of the procedure-specific risks, including the unforeseeable need for revision or redo surgery firstly due to weight regain or failing to reach the individual therapy target and secondly for worsening of a preexisting or de novo reflux disease.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2GastrectomyGastric BypassLaparoscopyObesity, MorbidFollow-Up StudiesHumansRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeWeight LossBarrett esophagusGastroesophageal reflux diseaseMetabolic surgeryObesity surgerySleeve gastrectomy

Identifiers

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.