Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37701000›Full record

ArticleCureus2023

A New and Effective Technique in the Endoscopic Treatment of Obesity and Regulation of Diabetes: The Pyloric Revision.

Murat Kanlioz, Ugur Ekici

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 76% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Murat KanliozGeneral Surgery, Flora Transplantation Institute, Istanbul, TUR.
Ugur EkiciGeneral Surgery, Flora Transplantation Institute, İstanbul, TUR.
Istanbul Florence Nightingale Hospital · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThis study aimed to investigate the role of the functional structure of the pylorus in obesity and diabetes and to determine the efficacy of a new method, pyloric revision (PR), in the treatment.

methodsThe pyloric structures of the patients who applied for endoscopic obesity treatment were examined, and the patients were classified as normotonic (NP), hypotonic (HP), and atonic (AP) according to their pyloric structures. PR was applied to those with pyloric structural disorders. Patients with NP were also given the preferred endoscopic treatment (balloon, botulinum toxin, Kanlioz technique). In addition, the pre-procedure fasting blood glucose (FBG) and glycated hemoglobin levels (HbA1c) of the patients were compared with the sixth-month post-procedure status. In order to compare the pyloric structure and other parameters in normal weights with the obese group, a second group of 100 normal-weight (BMI<25) individuals was formed and compared with the study group.

resultsIn patients with HP (93 patients) and AP (61 patients), a statistically significant decrease was found between HbA1c and FBG levels before treatment and six months after treatment (p˂0.02, p<0.001, respectively). There was a statistically significant difference in favor of the endoscopic obesity treatment group (EOTG) in terms of pyloric disorder, HbA1c, and FPG levels between the EOTG and the normal weight group (NWG) (p<0.0001).

conclusionWe recommend using PR as an easy-to-perform, effective, minimally invasive, reproducible, and cost-effective technique that does not require hospitalization.

Indexed as

appetite and sateitydiabetes mellitusendoscopic obesity treatmentsfeeling of fullnessobesity treatmentpyloric revision

Identifiers

PMID37701000
PMCPMC10493824
OpenAlexW4385783192

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.