Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31595402›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020

Short-term outcomes of single-port versus conventional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a propensity score matched analysis.

Hadrien Tranchart, Lionel Rebibo, Martin Gaillard, Abdennaceur Dhahri, Panagiotis Lainas, Jean-Marc Regimbeau, Ibrahim Dagher

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors.

Hadrien TranchartDepartment of Minimally Invasive Digestive Surgery, Antoine Béclère Hospital, AP-HP, 157 rue de la Porte de Trivaux, 92140, Clamart, France. hadrien.tranchart@aphp.fr.
Lionel RebiboDepartment of Digestive Surgery, Amiens University Hospital and Jules Verne University of Picardie, 80054, Amiens, France.
Martin GaillardDepartment of Minimally Invasive Digestive Surgery, Antoine Béclère Hospital, AP-HP, 157 rue de la Porte de Trivaux, 92140, Clamart, France.
Abdennaceur DhahriDepartment of Digestive Surgery, Amiens University Hospital and Jules Verne University of Picardie, 80054, Amiens, France.
Panagiotis LainasDepartment of Minimally Invasive Digestive Surgery, Antoine Béclère Hospital, AP-HP, 157 rue de la Porte de Trivaux, 92140, Clamart, France.
Jean-Marc RegimbeauDepartment of Digestive Surgery, Amiens University Hospital and Jules Verne University of Picardie, 80054, Amiens, France.
Ibrahim DagherDepartment of Minimally Invasive Digestive Surgery, Antoine Béclère Hospital, AP-HP, 157 rue de la Porte de Trivaux, 92140, Clamart, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSleeve gastrectomy (SG) has become a frequent bariatric procedure. Single-port sleeve gastrectomy (SPSG) could reduce parietal aggression however its development has been restrained due to fear of a complex procedure leading to increased morbidity and suboptimal sleeve construction. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of SPSG versus conventional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (CLSG) with regards to morbidity, weight loss, and co-morbidity resolution.

methodsBetween January 2015 and December 2016, data from all consecutive patients that underwent SPSG and CLSG in two institutions performing exclusively one or the other approach were retrospectively analyzed. Propensity score adjustment was performed on the factors known to influence the choice of approach.

resultsDuring the study period, 1122 patients underwent SG in both institutions (610 SPSG and 512 CLSG). From each group, 314 patients were successfully matched. A 15-min increase in operative time was observed during SPSG (P < 0.001). Postoperative morbidity was similar with a minor increase after SPSG (8.6 vs. 6.7%, P = 0.453). No differences in incisional hernia rates were observed (1.6 (SPSG) vs. 0.3% (CLSG), P = 0.216). Percentage of total weight loss was 31.1% and 28.2% in the CLSG and SPSG 12 months after surgery, respectively (P = 0.321). Co-morbidities resolution 12 months following the procedure was similar.

conclusionsSPSG can be performed safely with similar intraoperative and postoperative morbidity compared to CLSG. Weight loss and co-morbidities resolution at 1 year are equivalent. A 15-min longer operative time was the only negative side of SPSG.

Indexed as

Propensity ScoreAdultFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGastrectomyHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedObesity, MorbidOperative TimeRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsWeight LossBariatric surgeryLESSObesitySILSSleeve gastrectomy

Identifiers

PMID31595402

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.