Trial reportObesity surgery2021
Technical Feasibility, Outcomes, and Patient Satisfaction After Needlescopic and Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: a Randomized Study.
Trial report in Obesity surgery, 2021. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Needlescopic Laparoscope Sleeve Gastrectomy (NLSG): a Potential Surgical Approach.Obesity surgery · 2025Article
- The Interplay between Obesity and Inflammation.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- The Importance of Psychometric and Physical Scales for the Evaluation of the Consequences of Scars-A Literature Review.Clinics and practice · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeedlescopic instruments create a 3-mm incision and may result in less pain and superior cosmesis. There is limited understanding of the effectiveness of needlescopic instruments in patients with a body mass index (BMI) > 35 kg/m
methodsLaparoscopic bariatric procedures were performed on 30 adults at a single academic medical center from January to December 2017. Patients were randomized to conventional laparoscopy (LAP) or needlescopic (NEED) surgery. The Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (MBSRQ) and Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ) were completed at 6 months and 1 year. Univariate analysis was performed on perioperative outcomes and survey scores.
resultsSurgery was completed on patients in the LAP group (N = 13) and compared to the NEED group (N = 17). The mean BMI was 41.4 kg/m2 LAP and 41.1 kg/m2 NEED. The most common procedure was Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), with 13 RYGB in LAP and 12 RYGB in NEED (P = 0.76).The operative time was not significantly different between the LAP and the NEED group (209.5 ± 66.1 vs 181.9 ± 58.1 min, P = 0.48). There was no leak or mortality in the 30-day follow-up period. Within MBSRQ, the patient's appearance self-evaluation score was similar between LAP and NEED (2.5 ± 0.6 vs 2.4 ± 0.6, P = 0.61). Within PSAQ, the mean satisfaction score for incision appearance was also similar between LAP and NEED (16.1± 2.9 vs 15.4 ± 4.6, P = 0.85). Incision-related perceptions remained consistent at 6 months and 1 year after bariatric surgery.
conclusionsNeedlescopic instruments are safe and a viable alternative to use during bariatric surgery. Appearance and perception of scar were similar between groups. Further studies with needlescopic instruments should include patients with a BMI > 35 kg/m
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.