ArticleCureus2023
The Efficacy of Omentopexy During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Comparative Analysis of Surgical Outcomes, Complications, and Quality of Life.
Article in Cureus, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of Predictive Factors for the Efficacy of Modified Three-Port Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy in Treating Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2025Article
- Effect of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy on Thyroid Function Tests and Levothyroxine Doses in People With Obesity.Cureus · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe increasing popularity of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) as a bariatric procedure has been accompanied by concerns about potential complications, including staple line bleeding and leaks. Additionally, postoperative quality of life can be affected by gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and food-related issues. In light of these factors, there is a need to compare the outcomes of standard LSG with LSG with omentopexy. This comparative analysis aims to provide insights into the distinct recovery processes associated with these two approaches. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study aimed to compare the outcomes of LSG in two groups: LSG alone and LSG with omentopexy. Data collected from January 2022 to April 2022 included patient characteristics, surgical details, complications, medication usage, and follow-up. Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) scores were recorded at postoperative intervals of 15 days, one month, and three months.
resultsThis study analyzed 29 patients who underwent standard LSG and 36 patients who underwent LSG combined with omentopexy. The two groups exhibited similarities in terms of age, gender, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, surgical duration, complications, hospitalization duration, and medication requirements (p > 0.005). Telephone consultations were significantly higher in the LSG with omentopexy group (p < 0.001). Nausea (p = 0.486) and vomiting (p = 0.603) rates did not significantly differ, but the constipation rate at one month was higher in LSG with omentopexy (p = 0.244). The flatulence rate at one month was significantly higher in LSG with omentopexy (p < 0.007). GIQLI scores were significantly lower in LSG with omentopexy at 15 days (p < 0.001) and one month (p < 0.001), but not at three months (p = 0.884).
conclusionThis study demonstrates that LSG and LSG with omentopexy have similar surgical outcomes and short-term complications. However, differences exist in postoperative symptoms and quality of life experiences.
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.