Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37891370›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023

A comparative study between staple line reinforcement during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and no reinforcement: an Egyptian experience.

Mohamed Abdul Moneim Amin El Masry, Mohamed Sabry Attia

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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.

Mohamed Abdul Moneim Amin El MasryFaculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt. mmasry254@cu.edu.eg.ORCID 0000-0002-6532-2794
Mohamed Sabry AttiaFaculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Cairo University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become an increasingly popular bariatric procedure. LSG still conveys some risks, including early staple line complications such as bleeding and leaks. It has been proposed that staple line complications can be reduced by staple line reinforcement (SLR). This study aimed to compare the short-term efficacy and safety of the SLR during LSG by oversewing versus no SLR in an Egyptian cohort over a period of 11 years. PATIENTS AND

methodsThis is a retrospective study that analyzed data from patients undergoing LSG by the same surgeon over a period of 11 years. The patients' early postoperative complications were compared according to performing SLR.

resultsThe SLR group showed significantly longer surgery time (p = 0.021) and a lower rate of postoperative bleeding (p = 0.027). All leakage cases occurred in the non-SLR group (0.7% vs. 0.0%) without statistical significance (p = 0.212). The two mortality cases occurred in the non-SLR group. The LOS was comparable in the two groups (p = 0.289).

conclusionThis study confirms the short-term benefits of SLR by oversewing during LSG in terms of a lower incidence of 30-day morbidity, particularly bleeding, and lower rates of reoperation, with a clinically questionable longer operation time.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyObesity, MorbidEgyptGastrectomyHumansPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesSurgical StaplingTreatment OutcomeEarly postoperative morbidityLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG)ObesityOversewingStaple line reinforcement (SLR)

Identifiers

PMID37891370
PMCPMC10709468
OpenAlexW4387996722

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.