ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022
Fluid-filled intragastric balloons are an effective and safe weight loss option across BMI and age ranges.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endoscopic bariatrics: Current status and emerging technologies.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
- Efficacy and safety of intragastric balloon for obesity in Korea.Clinical endoscopy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionObesity is an expanding public health problem, resulting in more than half a billion adults worldwide. Intragastric balloon (IGB) placement is a weight loss alternative for obese patients with an inadequate weight loss response to diet and exercise. The aim of this study is to examine the efficacy and safety of the single-chamber fluid-filled IGB for weight loss and compare its results across different age groups.
methodsWe performed a database review of 239 consecutive patients from two outpatient GI clinics who underwent placement of an IGB. Our final analysis composed of 239 IGB placements in 232 patients (mean age, 44.5 ± 10.3 years; 67% female; baseline BMI 42.0 ± 9.0). Efficacy outcomes included the percentage of the total (%TWL) and excess weight loss (%EWL). Safety outcomes were measured as the number of patients who required early IGB removal (before 6 months).
results%TWL at 3 months was 10.1% and 14.4% at 6 months. Overall, 92%, 74%, and 47% of patients lost 5%, 10%, and 15% of total weight at 6 months, respectively. %EWL was 22.1% and 30.7% at 3 and 6 months post-IGB placement, respectively. The balloon was safely removed at six months after placement in most patients, whereas in 13.0% of cases early removal was performed at an average of 12.0 weeks after placement (range, 2 days-23 weeks).
conclusionThe use of a single-chamber fluid-filled IGB is successful in inducing a significant amount of weight loss in almost three-fourths of patients six months after its placement. This beneficial effect is seen across different BMI ranges and age groups at a similar level. IGBs should be considered an effective and safe alternative for obese patients who fail lifestyle interventions and conservative measures, fulfilling the unmet needs of many who are unwilling or unable to undergo bariatric surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34845556What 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.