ArticleObesity surgery2022
Laparoscopic Small Bowel Length Measurement in Bariatric Surgery Using a Hand-Over-Hand Technique with Marked Graspers: an Ex Vivo Experiment.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of tailoring biliopancreatic limb length based on total small bowel length versus standard limb length in one anastomosis gastric bypass: 1-year outcomes of the TAILOR randomized clinical superiority trial.The British journal of surgery · 2024Trial
- Factors Predicting Variability in Total Small Bowel Length (TSBL) in People With Obesity Undergoing Metabolic Bariatric Surgery.Obesity surgery · 2026Article
- Small Intestine Length Measurement Using 3D CT Volumetry and in Vivo Laparoscopic Measurement Using Pre-marked Graspers: A Comparative Study.Obesity surgery · 2026Article
- Case Report: Single-incision laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy plus jejunojejunal bypass for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in patients with obesity: a case series and review.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Development of an artificial intelligence based virtual tool for measuring distances during image-guided surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Counting Limb Length Ratios in Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A Demonstration of Safety and Feasibility Using a 25-Patient Case Series in a High-Volume Academic Center.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Revisional surgery for malnutrition after SADI-S: prevalence, indications, techniques and outcomes.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Measuring Small Bowel Length in Bariatric Surgery: An Ex Vivo Laparoscopic Training Experiment.Surgical innovation · 2024Article
- Technical Considerations in One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass-the Israeli Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Experience.Obesity surgery · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTailoring limb length in bariatric surgery is a subject of many studies. To acquire the optimal limb length, accurate measurement of the small bowel length is essential.
objectiveTo assess the intra- and inter-individual variability of laparoscopic bowel length measurement using a hand-over-hand technique with marked graspers.
methodFour bariatric surgeons and four surgical residents performed measurements on cadaver porcine intestine in a laparoscopic box using marked graspers. Each participant performed 10 times a measurement of three different lengths: 150, 180, and 210 cm. Acceptable percentage deviation from the goal lengths was defined as less than 10%, while unacceptable deviations were defined as more than 15%.
resultsThe bariatric surgeons measured the 150-, 180-, and 210-cm tasks with 4% (CI 0.4, 9), - 6% (CI - 11, - 0.8), and 1% (CI - 4, 6) deviation, respectively. In total, the bariatric surgeons estimated 58 out of 119 times (49%) between the margins of 10% deviation and 36 times (30%) outside the 15% margin. Considerable inter-individual differences were found between the surgeons. The surgical residents underestimated the tasks with 12% (CI - 18, - 6), 16% (CI - 19, - 13), and 18% (CI - 22, - 13), respectively.
conclusionBariatric surgeons estimated bowel length with on average less than 10% deviation. However, this still resulted in 30% of the measurements with more than 15% deviation. There were considerable inter-individual differences between the surgeons and residents structurally underestimated the bowel length. Ascertainment of measurement accuracy and adequate training is essential for bariatric procedures in which limb length is of importance.
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.