Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32857247›Full record

SynthesisLangenbeck's archives of surgery2021

Barbed versus conventional thread used in laparoscopic gastric bypass: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mohamed Ali Chaouch, Tarek Kellil, Sahbi Khaled Taieb, Khadija Zouari

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mohamed Ali ChaouchDepartment of Digestive Surgery, Fattouma Bourguiba Hospital, Monastir University, Monastir, Tunisia. Docmedalichaouch@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9013-5229
Tarek KellilDepartment of Digestive Surgery, Fattouma Bourguiba Hospital, Monastir University, Monastir, Tunisia.
Sahbi Khaled TaiebDepartment of Digestive Surgery, Fattouma Bourguiba Hospital, Monastir University, Monastir, Tunisia.
Khadija ZouariDepartment of Digestive Surgery, Fattouma Bourguiba Hospital, Monastir University, Monastir, Tunisia.
Hospital Fatuma Bourguiba Monastir · TN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHand-sewn gastrointestinal anastomosis during laparoscopic gastric bypass (GBP) could be performed using the conventional multifilament suture (CS) or a barbed suture (BS). This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to assess the advantages and disadvantages of these two anastomosis alternatives.

methodsBibliographic search for relevant studies was performed, according to the PRISMA guidelines, to perform the systematic review with meta-analysis. RevMan was applied to analyze the data using the random effects size.

resultsEight studies were eligible for analysis including 26,340 patients. These patients underwent a single gastric bypass or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. According to the available data from this systematic review with meta-analysis, BS in GBP ensures similar morbidity rate (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.82 to 1.31, p = 0.74) with shorter operative time (MD = - 7.90, 95% CI: - 12.95 to - 2.84, p = 0.002). BS is similar to CS in terms of anastomotic leak (OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.73, p = 0.19), stricture (OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.32 to 2.44, p = 0.82), bleeding (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.20 to 1.86, p = 0.39), and hospital stay (MD: 0.04, 95% CI: - 0.28 to 1.86, p = 0.81). On the other way, BS is cheaper than CS.

conclusionThe majority of studies were retrospectives. One study included the large majority of retained patients; thus then, this comparison should be interpreted with caution. BS and CS in gastrointestinal anastomosis during GBP are feasible and safe. BS is faster and cheaper with similar postoperative outcomes.

Indexed as

Gastric BypassLaparoscopyObesity, MorbidAnastomosis, Roux-en-YAnastomotic LeakHumansPostoperative ComplicationsSuturesSuture TechniquesAnastomosisBarbed sutureConventional sutureGastric bypassRoux-en-Y gastric bypassSingle anastomosis gastric bypass

Identifiers

PMID32857247
OpenAlexW3081736325

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.