ArticleObesity surgery2025
Comparative Analysis of the Effectiveness and Frequency of Complications of Different Techniques of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy in Patients with Obesity.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
relevanceLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is recognized as an effective method for treating severe obesity; however, technical variations in this procedure significantly impact the complication profile and long-term metabolic outcomes.
objectiveTo compare the clinical effectiveness, frequency of postoperative complications, and body weight outcomes using three LSG strategies: standard (Standard), enhanced (Tight), and modified (Wide). MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study included 1,194 patients with obesity who underwent LSG between 2019 and 2022. Patients were not randomized to a specific LSG technique; rather, the choice reflected both clinical profile and the chronological evolution of practice in our center. Initially, the Standard technique was applied, followed by the Tight technique in cases of suboptimal initial response, and finally the Wide technique was adopted to achieve a safer balance between efficacy and safety. Early and late surgical and metabolic complications, body mass index (BMI) reduction, and the frequency of weight recurrence over 36 months (per IFSO definition: ≥ 25% regain from nadir) were assessed. Data analysis was performed using Python (SciPy, StatsModels, Pandas). Normality of distribution was tested using the Shapiro-Wilk test. For between-group comparisons, Student's t-test or the Mann-Whitney U test were used for continuous variables depending on distribution, and the χ
resultsThe lowest overall complication rate was observed in the Wide group (26.85%) compared to the Tight (49.39%) and Standard (35.22%) groups (p < 0.001). The incidence of early metabolic disorders was 15.76% in the Wide group versus 64.34% in the Wide group (p < 0.001). Late complications (GERD, nutritional deficiencies) were also significantly less frequent in the Wide group. Although the Tight technique resulted in the greatest BMI reduction (to 22.4 ± 3.8 kg/m
conclusionsThe modified LSG technique provides the optimal balance between effectiveness and safety. It enables significant and sustained weight loss with minimal risks of metabolic, functional, and psychological complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41118095What 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.