ArticleObesity surgery2022
Trends in the Utilization of Intragastric Balloons: a 5-Year Analysis of the MBSAQIP Registry.
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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic Versus Surgical Bariatric Interventions for Obesity: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine research · 2026Article
- Endo-hepatology: Bridging the gap between lumen and liver.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Review
- Small Bowel Obstruction Following Dislodgement of an Intragastric Balloon: A Case Report.Cureus · 2024Article
- Safety and Efficacy of 12-Month Intra-gastric Balloon-Series of over 1100 Patients.Obesity surgery · 2024Article
- Overview on the endoscopic treatment for obesity: A review.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Endobariatrics: a Still Underutilized Weight Loss Tool.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Endo-bariatric therapies as a treatment strategy for MASLD.Clinical liver diseaseReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe use of intragastric balloons (IGBs) for the treatment of obesity was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2015. This study aims to characterize preoperative factors and outcomes of patients undergoing IGB therapy compared to bariatric surgery (non-IGB) and evaluate 5-year trends in IGB use.
methodsA retrospective cohort study was performed by extracting data from the MBSAQIP registry between 2015 and 2019. All non-IGB and IGB procedures were included while revisional and emergency surgeries were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine independent predictors of patient selection for IGB therapy.
resultsOf 652,927 patients identified, only 2910 (0.4%) underwent IGB therapy. Patients who underwent IGB therapy were older (46.7 ± 11.4 years vs 44.4 ± 12.0 years; p < 0.0001), had lower BMI at baseline (37.0 ± 6.2 kg/m
conclusionsAppropriate indications for IGBs appear to be increasingly limited. The ongoing role of IGBs in the treatment of obesity is unclear given the safety and efficacy of modern bariatric surgery and new pharmacological agents for weight loss.
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.