ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Comparable improvement and resolution of obesity-related comorbidities in endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty vs laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: single-center study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 5 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparing long-term weight loss and complications in endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty versus Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Obesity surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative Safety of Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty Versus Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Meta-Analysis of over 1.1 Million Patients.Obesity surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty versus Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: comparative effectiveness, safety, and metabolic outcomes: A Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis.Obesity surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Shaping the Future of Restrictive Bariatric Surgery: Clinical, Economic, and Long-Term Perspectives on Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Sleeve.Obesity surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Endoscopic Versus Surgical Bariatric Interventions for Obesity: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine research · 2026Article
- Description of the Characteristics of Sleeve Gastrectomy Patients and the Effect of Bowel Movement on Quality of Life After Sleeve Gastrectomy.Obesity surgery · 2025Article
- Comparing Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty (ESG) and Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG) 30-Day Outcomes and Healthcare Utilization: A Multi-Centered Retrospective Cohort Study of 506,597 Patients.Obesity surgery · 2025Article
- Comparative impact of different weight loss strategies on obstructive sleep apnea: an integrated review of surgical, pharmacological, and lifestyle interventions.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- The Endoscopic Optimization for Obesity in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Wall Reconstruction.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite excellent surgical outcomes, a minority of qualified patients undergo weight loss surgery. Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty (ESG), an incisionless procedure, has proven to be effective in achieving weight loss and comorbidity improvement. We aim to compare outcomes of ESG to those of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG).
methodA retrospective review of a prospective database of patients who underwent ESG and LSG at NorthShore University HealthSystem from 2016 to 2023 was completed. Demographic and outcome data were analyzed. Pre- and post-surgical data were compared using chi-square and two-sample t tests. Improvement or resolution of obesity-related comorbidities were also assessed.
resultsA total of 212 LSG and 68 ESG patients were reviewed. ESG patients were older (47 ± 10 vs. 43 ± 12, p = 0.006) and less obese (BMI 37.0 ± 5.5 vs. 45.8 ± 0.4, p < 0.001) than LSG patients. Median length of stay after ESG was 0 days and after LSG 1 day (p < 0.001). Severe adverse events were seen less frequent after ESG (1.47%, vs 3.77%). LSG achieved more significant %TBWL at 6 months (25.2 ± 8.9 vs 14.9 ± 7.4), 1 year (27.5 ± 10.8 vs 14.1 ± 9.8), and 2 years (25.7 ± 10.8 vs 10.5 ± 8.8, all p < 0.001) after surgery when compared to ESG. LSG achieved significantly greater %EWL compared to ESG at 6 months (57.0 ± 20.7 vs 50.4 ± 29.2, p = 0.137), 1 year (61.4 ± 24.6 vs 46.5 ± 34.0, p = 0.026), and 2 years postoperatively (59.7 ± 25.5 vs 32.6 ± 28.2, p = 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in rates of improvement or resolution of diabetes, obstructive sleep apnea, hyperlipidemia, or hypertension.
conclusionESG is an effective procedure for weight loss and comorbidity resolution. Obesity-related comorbidities are comparably improved and resolved following ESG vs LSG. Although the weight loss in LSG is significantly higher, patients can expect a shorter hospital length of stay and a lower rate of complications after ESG. ESG continues to show promise for long-term weight loss and improvement in health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39271507What 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.