SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2021
Customized bariatric stents for sleeve gastrectomy leak: are they superior to conventional esophageal stents? A systematic review and proportion meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vacuum Therapy and Internal Drainage as the First-Line Endoscopic Treatment for Post-Bariatric Leaks: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Visceral medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Asynchronous tele-mentoring in proficiency-based training for the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery (FLS): a use of smartphones and deliberate practice.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Leaks after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: 2024 update on risk factors.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Review
- Endoscopic vacuum therapy: pitfalls, tips and tricks, insights, and perspectives.Translational gastroenterology and hepatology · 2024Review
- Endoscopic treatment of upper gastrointestinal postsurgical leaks: a narrative review.Clinical endoscopy · 2023Review
- CIRSE Standards of Practice on Oesophageal and Gastroduodenal Stenting.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2023Article
- Choosing the best endoscopic approach for post-bariatric surgical leaks and fistulas: Basic principles and recommendations.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Endoscopic Management of Postoperative Esophageal and Upper GI Defects-A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- The Effect of Single-Anastomosis Sleeve Ileal (SASI) Bypass on Patients with Severe Obesity in Three Consecutive Years.World journal of surgery · 2022Article
- Endoscopic Stent Placement to Treat Gastric Leak Following Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: the Bigger, the Better.Obesity surgery · 2022Article
- Bigger is not always better for the endoscopic treatment of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) leaks using fully covered stents.Obesity surgery · 2022Article
- Status of bariatric endoscopy-what does the surgeon need to know? A review.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2022Article
- Cost-effective modified endoscopic vacuum therapy for the treatment of gastrointestinal transmural defects: step-by-step process of manufacturing and its advantages.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 13 institutions in 12 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveRecently, there has been a burgeoning interest in the utilization of customized bariatric stents (CBS) for management of sleeve gastrectomy leak (SGL). We aimed to conduct a proportion meta-analysis to evaluate the cumulative efficacy and safety of these new stents and to compare them with the conventional esophageal stents (CES).
methodsA systematic literature search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases was conducted through May 1, 2020. Primary outcomes were technical and clinical success and post-procedure adverse events of CBS and CES. Secondary outcomes were number of stents and endoscopic sessions per patient, and time to leak closure. A proportion meta-analysis was performed on outcomes using a random-effects model, and the weighted pooled rates (WPRs) or mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.
resultsThe WPR with 95% CI of technical success, clinical success, and stent migration for CBS were 99% (93-100%) I
conclusionsIn treatment of SGL, there is very low level evidence that CES are superior to CBS in terms of clinical success and migration rate, though may require more stent insertions and endoscopic procedures. The evidence however remains very uncertain. Perhaps relevant to some types of stents, CBS are promising; however design modification is strongly recommended to improve outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.