ArticleObesity surgery2026
Comparative Clinical Effectiveness and Operating Efficiency of Different Ultrasonic Devices for Performance of Sleeve Gastrectomy.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aims to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes of using different ultrasonic energy devices in patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy (SG).
methodsThe patient cohort was extracted from PINC AI™ Healthcare Data 2019-2023, including individuals aged ≥ 18 who underwent primary elective gastric sleeve procedures using either corded (CD) or cordless (CL) ultrasonic devices (UD). Two analysis groups were evaluated: total SG regardless of the - stapler brand used in the operation (Cohort I), and UD used with an identifiable same-brand stapler in the operation (Cohort II). A propensity score matching (PSM) method with a caliper of 0.2 and 1:1 nearest-neighbor matching was performed for patients who used CD and CL. We applied multivariable generalized linear model (GLM) analyses for sensitivity analyses.
results24160 and 18906 patients were included for cohorts I (82.3% CD and 17.7% CL; 4268 PSM paired) and II (81.7% CD and 18.3% CL; 3282 PSM paired), respectively. CD had higher operating-room time (minutes) than CL in both Cohort I (mean difference: 27 (95% confidence interval (CI): (24, 29), p < 0.001) and II (27 (24, 30), p < 0.001). There is no difference in incidence rates of blood transfusion, bleeding, and 30-day readmission, and total inpatient cost and length of stay between CD and CL. The sensitivity analyses showed similar results.
conclusionsThe study shows that CL had similar clinical and economic outcomes to CD, and CL was more efficient in patients treated with sleeve gastrectomy. KEY POINTS: • Cordless ultrasonic devices were more efficient when used in sleeve gastrectomy. • Outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy used cordless/corded ultrasonic device were similar. • Resource use of cordless/corded ultrasonic device was similar in sleeve gastrectomy.
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.