ArticleObesity surgery2026
Mechanizing the Laparoscope Operator in Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Single-Surgeon Before-and-After Study of a Pneumatic Endoscope-Holding Device (Lock-Arm®).
Article in Obesity surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundJapan faces a critical shortage of gastrointestinal surgeons. In the Japanese standard of care for laparoscopic surgery, three physicians are required: a primary surgeon, a first assistant, and a dedicated laparoscope operator. Freeing the third team member by using a mechanical endoscope-holding device could preserve surgical capacity, but its impact on operative efficiency and safety has not been rigorously quantified.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective before-and-after study of 138 consecutive laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) cases performed by a single surgeon at a community bariatric center. The H group (n = 69) used a human laparoscope operator (Reverse Trendelenburg position, legs apart); the M group (n = 69) used the Lock-Arm® pneumatic passive endoscope holder (Reverse Trendelenburg position, legs together). Primary outcomes were OR occupancy time and operative time. Secondary outcomes included blood loss, intraoperative body temperature at three time points, Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complications, and postoperative length of stay. The study was reported in accordance with the STROBE statement.
resultsPatient demographics were comparable between groups. OR occupancy time was shorter in the M group (175.7 ± 19.8 vs. 182.7 ± 21.2 min; MD - 7.0 min, 95% CI - 13.8 to - 0.1; p = 0.049). Operative time was significantly reduced (104.7 ± 14.5 vs. 117.1 ± 19.8 min; MD - 12.4 min, 95% CI - 18.2 to - 6.6; p < 0.0001; Cohen's d = 0.72). Body temperature at end of surgery was higher in the M group (37.1 ± 0.4 vs. 36.6 ± 0.4 °C; MD + 0.43 °C, 95% CI + 0.29 to + 0.57; p < 0.0001; Cohen's d = 1.04). No Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complications occurred in either group.
conclusionsMechanizing the laparoscope operator role with the Lock-Arm® was associated with a significant reduction in operative time of approximately 12 min (10.6%), improved intraoperative thermoregulation, and maintained safety. This low-technology pneumatic device offers a practical strategy for sustaining laparoscopic surgical quality under surgical workforce constraints.
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.