ArticleObesity surgery2019
Alternative Method of Mesenteric Defect Closure after Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2019. 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.
- Incidence and management of internal hernia after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass without preventive closure of mesenteric defects: a single-center retrospective study.Updates in surgery · 2025Article
- Risk of Reopening of the Mesenteric Defects After Routine Closure in Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Single-Centre Experience.Obesity surgery · 2022Article
- INCISIONAL HERNIA AFTER BARIATRIC SURGERY: ONLY THE PHYSICAL EXAMINATION IS ENOUGH?Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRoux-en-Y gastric bypass is the gold standard for weight loss surgery. This procedure creates two to three mesenteric defects, depending on ante-colic versus retro-colic technique. Current literature supports mesenteric defect closure, but there is no consensus on how to best close these defects. Described options include running separate suture lines for each defect, or employing endoscopic staplers for defect closure.
methodsThis is a video/dynamic manuscript on operative technique.
resultsWe describe an alternative technique that does not require an extra laparoscopic instrument and is more efficient than traditional suture lines due to less suturing.
conclusionsThe technique maintains low gastric bypass complication rates by closing mesenteric defects, while keeping intra-operative costs low, and minimizing time spent on the defect closures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30569371What 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.