Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34731416›Full record

ArticleObesity surgery2022

Endoscopic Stent Placement Can Successfully Treat Gastric Leak Following Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy If and Only If an Esophagoduodenal Megastent Is Used.

Franck Billmann, Aylin Pfeiffer, Peter Sauer, Adrian Billeter, Christian Rupp, Ronald Koschny, Felix Nickel, Moritz von Frankenberg, Beat Peter Müller-Stich, Anja Schaible

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Franck BillmannDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 420, D-69120, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5076-2332
Aylin PfeifferDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 420, D-69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Peter SauerInterdisciplinary Endoscopic Center, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 420, D-69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Adrian BilleterDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 420, D-69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Christian RuppInterdisciplinary Endoscopic Center, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 420, D-69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Ronald KoschnyInterdisciplinary Endoscopic Center, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 420, D-69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Felix NickelDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 420, D-69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Moritz von FrankenbergKrankenhaus Salem, Zeppelinstraße 11-33, D-69121, Heidelberg, Germany.
Beat Peter Müller-StichDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 420, D-69120, Heidelberg, Germany. BeatPeter.Mueller@med.uni-heidelberg.de.
Anja SchaibleDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 420, D-69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Heidelberg University · DEKrankenhaus Salem · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeGastric staple line leakage (GL) is a serious complication of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), with a specific mortality ranging from 0.2 to 3.7%. The current treatment of choice is stent insertion. However, it is unclear whether the type of stent which is inserted affects treatment outcome. Therefore, we aimed not only to determine the effectiveness of stent treatment for GL but also to specifically clarify whether treatment outcome was dependent on the type of stent (small- (SS) or megastent (MS)) which was used. PATIENTS AND

methodsA single-centre retrospective study of 23 consecutive patients was conducted to compare the outcomes of SS (n = 12) and MS (n = 11) for the treatment of GL following LSG. The primary outcome measure was the success rate of stenting, defined as complete healing of the GL without changing the treatment strategy. Treatment change or death were both coded as failure.

resultsThe success rate of MS was 91% (10/11) compared to only 50% (6/12) for SS (p = 0.006). An average of 2.3 ± 0.5 and 6.8 ± 3.7 endoscopies were required to achieve healing in the MS and SS groups respectively (p < 0.001). The average time to resumption of oral nutrition was shorter in the MS group (1.4 ± 1.1 days vs. 23.1 ± 33.1 days, p = 0.003).

conclusionsStent therapy is only effective and safe for the treatment of GL after LSG if a MS is used. Treatment with a MS may not only increase treatment success rates but may also facilitate earlier resumption of oral nutrition and shorten the duration of hospitalization.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyObesity, MorbidAnastomotic LeakGastrectomyHumansRetrospective StudiesStentsTreatment OutcomeBariatric surgeryGastrectomy, Postoperative complicationsLaparoscopic surgeryStentTreatment efficacy

Identifiers

PMID34731416
PMCPMC8752538
OpenAlexW3208214227

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.