Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37991711›Full record

ArticleObesity surgery2024

The Evaluation of Gastric Emptying Using Nuclear Scintigraphy Compared to Three-Dimensional Multi-detector Computed Tomography (3D-MDCT) Gastric Volumetry in the Assessment of Poor Weight Loss Following Sleeve Gastrectomy.

Anagi Wickremasinghe, Jessica Ferdinands, Yazmin Johari, Patrick Ho, Yit Leang, Helen Yue, Cheryl Laurie, Paul Beech, David P Nadebaum, Kenneth S Yap and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. 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

13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Anagi WickremasingheDepartment of Surgery, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. anagi.wickremasinghe@monash.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-9876-7792
Jessica FerdinandsDepartment of Surgery, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Yazmin JohariDepartment of Surgery, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Patrick HoDepartment of Radiology, The Avenue Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Yit LeangDepartment of Surgery, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Helen YueDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and PET, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Cheryl LaurieDepartment of Surgery, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Paul BeechDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and PET, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
David P NadebaumDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and PET, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Kenneth S YapDepartment of Nuclear Medicine and PET, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
Geoffrey HebbardDepartment of Gastroenterology, Royal Melbourne Hospital and University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Wendy BrownDepartment of Surgery, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Paul BurtonDepartment of Surgery, Central Clinical School, Monash University, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
The Alfred Hospital · AUMonash University · AUThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoor weight loss and weight regain are principal challenges following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). There is a lack of standardised assessments and diagnostic tests to stratify the status post-LSG and determine whether anatomical or physiological problem exists. We aimed to compare nuclear scintigraphy gastric emptying with CT volumetric analysis of sleeve anatomy and determine the impact of anatomy on physiological function and its correlation with weight loss. MATERIALS AND

methodsPatients greater than 12 months post-LSG were categorised into optimal weight loss (OWL) (n = 29) and poor weight loss groups (PWL) (n = 50). All patients underwent a protocolised nuclear scintigraphy and three-dimensional multi-detector computed tomography (3D-MDCT) gastric volumetry imaging.

resultsPost-operative % total weight loss in OWL was 26.2 ± 10.5% vs. 14.2 ± 10.7% in the PWL group (p value < 0.0001). The PWL group had significantly more delayed gastric emptying half-time than OWL (34.1 ± 18.8 vs. 19.5 ± 4.7, p value < 0.0001). Gastric emptying half-time showed statistically significant correlations with weight loss parameters (BMI; r = 0.215, p value 0.048, %EWL; r =  - 0.336, p value 0.002 and %TWL; r =  - 0.379, p value < 0.001). The median gastric volume on 3D-MDCT did not differ between the OWL (246 (IQR 50) ml) and PWL group (262 (IQR 129.5) ml), p value 0.515. Nuclear scintigraphy gastric emptying half-time was the most highly discriminant measure. A threshold of 21.2 min distinguished OWL from PWL patients with 86.4% sensitivity and 68.4% specificity.

conclusionNuclear scintigraphy is a potentially highly accurate tool in the functional assessment of sleeve gastrectomy physiology. It appears to perform better as a diagnostic test than volumetric assessment. Gastric volume did not correlate with weight loss outcomes. We have established diagnostic criteria of greater than 21 min to assess sleeve failure, which is linked to suboptimal weight loss outcomes.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyObesity, MorbidGastrectomyGastric EmptyingHumansRadionuclide ImagingRetrospective StudiesTomographyTomography, X-Ray ComputedTreatment OutcomeWeight LossBariatric outcomeDiagnostic testGastric emptyingNuclear scintigraphyPhysiologyPoor weight lossSleeveThree-dimensional multi-detector computed tomography (3D-MDCT) gastric volumetry

Identifiers

PMID37991711
OpenAlexW4388912670

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.