Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32691207›Full record

Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2021

Does antrum size matter in sleeve gastrectomy? A prospective randomized study.

Francesco Pizza, Dario D'Antonio, Francesco Saverio Lucido, Claudio Gambardella, Juan Antonio Carbonell Asíns, Chiara Dell'Isola, Salvatore Tolone

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Revisional Surgeries of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2021
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Francesco PizzaDepartment of Surgery, Hospital "A. Rizzoli", Aslnapoli2nord, Naples, Italy. Francesco_pizza@libero.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9785-4405
Dario D'AntonioDepartment of Surgery, Hospital "A. Rizzoli", Aslnapoli2nord, Naples, Italy.
Francesco Saverio LucidoDivision of General, Mininvasive and Bariatric Surgery, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Claudio GambardellaDivision of General, Mininvasive and Bariatric Surgery, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Juan Antonio Carbonell AsínsBioinformatics and Biostatistics Unit, Biomedical Research Institute (INCLIVA), Valencia, Spain.
Chiara Dell'IsolaDepartment of Infectious Diseases, AORN "Dei Colli", Naples, Italy.
Salvatore ToloneDivision of General, Mininvasive and Bariatric Surgery, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · ITINCLIVA Health Research Institute · ESOrthopedic Institute · USOspedale Monaldi · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is a safe and effective bariatric procedure in terms of excess weight loss. Nevertheless, controversies still exist on several technical and operative aspects of LSG. The aim of this study is to evaluate variations in anthropometric features in subjects with a LSG gastric resection starting from 2 cm or 6 cm from the pylorus. Secondary aim was the evaluation of differences in morbidity, food tolerance, and GERD incidence studied with upper endoscopy (UE) and GERD Health-Related Quality-of-Life score.

methodsPatients were prospectively randomized into 2 groups: Group A (at 2 cm proximally to the pylorus) and Group B (at 6 cm proximally to the pylorus). All patients were followed-up at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. UE was performed in all patients at 12 or 24 months.

resultsOne hundred and fifty met the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study. The anthropometric features (BMI, %EWL, %TWL) resulted statistically different in the first 12 months (24.2 ± 3.4 vs 27.5 ± 4.3, 63.7 ± 14.1 vs 59.6 ± 12.5 and 42.9 ± 7.4 vs 38.2 ± 6.2), in favor of group A. At 24 months the differences disappeared (25.2 ± 4.4 vs 26.2 ± 3.3, 62.8 ± 13.1 vs 61.6 ± 10.5 and 41.9 ± 7.4 vs 40.2 ± 6.2). An increased GERD was found in both groups postoperatively with a higher incidence in group A at 6-month follow-up.

conclusionPerforming the LSG with a radical antrectomy could improve weight loss at 12-month follow-up but expose to lower food tolerance and higher transitory GERD. The differences seem to be reduced to a 24-month.

Indexed as

Gastroesophageal RefluxLaparoscopyObesity, MorbidGastrectomyHumansProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeEsophagitisGastroesophageal refluxGERD-HRQLObesitySleeve gastrectomyUpper endoscopy

Identifiers

PMID32691207
OpenAlexW3044728478

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.