ArticleHeliyon2024
Magnetic anchoring device assisted-laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus conventional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current evidence and future perspectives on magnet-assisted bariatric surgery (MABS): a systematic review.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2026Pooled it
- Safety and efficacy of magnetic-anchoring vs conventional video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lung resection: a randomized controlled trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Trial
- The development and application of magnetic surgery in clinical treatment.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bariatric surgeries, including the sleeve gastrectomy, have been recognized as the most effectively treatment strategy for severe obesity. Magnetic devices have been successfully used in bariatric surgeries. Here, we intended to evaluate the safety and efficiency of magnetic anchoring device assisted-laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (MLSG), and to make a comparison of the short-term results between conventional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (CLSG) and MLSG. Methods: The retrospective cohort study was carried out by analyzing and summarizing the data from a database of routinely collected data. The cohort included the patients who underwent either CLSG ( Results: The two groups were similar in gender, age, body mass index, abdominal girth, as well as the type and proportion of comorbidities. And the cases in MLSG group had a markedly shorter time of operation (MLSG, 72.59 min vs. CLSG, 76.67 min; Conclusion: Both MLSG and CLSG prove safe and effective, and the patients underwent MLSG have a shorter length of stay in hospital, and a better QOL during 6 months after surgery.
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.