ReviewObesity surgery2026
Rapid Scoping Review of Stent Outcomes for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Leaks: A Need for Definitions, Clarity, and Predictive Models.
Review in Obesity surgery, 2026. 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.
- Article
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
The evidence base of the outcomes of stent placement for post-metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) leaks appears inconsistent. Using three electronic databases, we undertook a scoping review of the literature to identify reasons why this could be the case. Twenty-one published items were included. We observed discrepancies pertaining to definitions of stent success/failure, time frames used for such definitions, characteristics of calculating and reporting stent outcome rates, and inconsistent predictors of stent success, and there were no predictive models of post-MBS stent outcomes. Potential solutions are proposed to these challenges as initial steps to standardized definitions, more clarity, and predictive models rendering calculation of rates and their comparisons more accurate. Attention to these could contribute to a rigorous evidence of stent outcomes and their predictors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41364418What 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.