ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020
The GAMMA concept (gastrointestinal activity manipulation to modulate appetite) preliminary proofs of the concept of local vibrational gastric mechanical stimulation.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Weight Loss and Gastrointestinal Hormone Variation Caused by Gastric Artery Embolization: An Updated Analysis Study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMechanical stimulation of the stretch receptors of the gastric wall can simulate the presence of indigested food leading to reduced food intake. We report the preliminary experimental results of an innovative concept of localized mechanical gastric stimulation.
methodsIn a first survival study, a biocompatible bulking agent was injected either in the greater curvature (n = 8) or in the cardia wall (n = 8) of Wistar rats. Six animals served as sham. Changes of bulking volume, leptin levels and weight gain were monitored for 3 months. In a second acute study, a micro-motor (n = 10; MM) or a size-paired inactive device (n = 10; ID) where applied on the cardia, while 10 additional rats served as sham. Serum ghrelin and leptin were measured at baseline and every hour (T0-T1-T2-T3), during 3 h. In a third study, 24 implants of various shapes and sizes were introduced into the gastric subserosa of 6 Yucatan pigs. Monthly CT scans and gastroscopies were done for 6 months.
resultsWeight gain in the CW group was significant lower after 2 weeks and 3 months when compared to the shame and GC (p = 0.01/p = 0.01 and p = 0.048/p = 0.038 respectively). Significant lower increase of leptin production occurred at 2 weeks (p = 0.01) and 3 months (p = 0.008) in CW vs. SG. In the MM group significant reduction of the serum ghrelin was seen after 3 h. Leptin was significantly increased in both MM and ID groups after 3 h, while it was significantly reduced in sham rats. The global device retention was 43.5%. Devices with lower profile and with a biocompatible coating remained more likely in place without complications.
conclusionsGastric mechanical stimulation induced a reduced weight gain and hormonal changes. Low profile and coated devices inserted within the gastric wall are more likely to be integrated.
Indexed as
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.