ArticleObesity surgery2023
Magnetic-Assisted Reduced-Port Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Comparative Study.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current evidence and future perspectives on magnet-assisted bariatric surgery (MABS): a systematic review.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2026Pooled it
- Reduced Port Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Obesity surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Safety and efficacy of magnetic-anchoring vs conventional video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lung resection: a randomized controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Trial
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSleeve gastrectomy is one of the most popular bariatric surgeries. With the advent of new technologies, a reduced-port approach assisted by magnets for sleeve gastrectomy (RPSG-MA) has been developed. The aim of our study is to compare the short-term results of RPSG-MA vs conventional laparoscopic SG (CLSG).
methodsA comparative study was performed. We compared two groups who underwent RPSG-MA (n=150) and CLSG (n=135) between January 2020 and January 2022.
resultsBoth groups were similar in body mass index, age, sex, and type of comorbidities. The operative time was similar in both groups (RPSG-MA, 52.5 min vs CLSG, 52.9 min; p = 0.829). Length of hospital (1.07 days) stay was significantly shorter in the RPSG-MA group (p = 0.00) than in the CLSG group (1.51 days). There were no conversions to open surgery in any patient or any fatal event. Complications encountered were similar in both groups postoperative. There were minor adverse events directly related to the magnetic device in 3 cases, these being mild hepatic lacerations, resolved with hemostatic measures.
conclusionThe magnet-assisted reduced-port gastric sleeve compared to the conventional technique has proven to be safe, technically feasible and with multiple benefits.
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.