Cited by 37Bariatric Surgery and OutcomesMinimally Invasive Surgical TechniquesBody Contouring and Surgery

Randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic greater curvature plication versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy

Grubnik, V. V., Ospanov, O. B., Namaeva, K. A., Medvedev, O. V., Kresyun, M. S.·2016·Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract

Background Laparoscopic greater curvature plication (LGCP) is a new restrictive bariatric procedure, which has a similar restrictive mechanism like laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) without potential risk of leak. Aim of the study was to compare 2-year outcomes of LSG and LGCP.Methods Multicenter prospective randomized trial was started in 2010. A total of 54 patients with morbid obesity were allocated either to LGCP group (n = 25) or LSG group (n = 27). Main exclusion criteria were: ASA > III, age > 75 and BMI > 65 kg/m(2). There were 40 women and 12 men, and the mean age was 42.6 ± 6.8 years (range 35-62). Data on the operation time, complications, hospital stay, body mass index loss, percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL), loss of appetite and improvement in comorbidities were collected during the follow-up examinations.Results All procedures were completed laparoscopically. The mean operative time was 92.0 ± 15 min for LSG and 73 ± 19 min for LGCP (p > 0.05). The mean hospital stay was 4.0 ± 1.9 days in the LSG group and 3.8 ± 1.7 days in LGCP group (p > 0.05). One year after surgery, the mean %EWL was 59.5 ± 15.4 % in LSG group and 45.8 ± 17 % in LGCP group (p > 0.05). After 2 years, mean %EWL was 78.9 ± 20 % in the LSG group and 42.4 ± 18 % in the LGCP group (p < 0.01). After 3 years, mean %EWL was 72.8 ± 22 in the LSG group and only 20.5 ± 23.9 in the LGCP group (p < 0.01). Loss of feeling of hunger after 2 years was 25 % in LGCP group and 76.9 % in the LSG group (p < 0.05). The comorbidities including diabetes, sleep apnea and hypertension were markedly improved in the both groups after surgery.Conclusion The short-term outcomes demonstrated equal effectiveness of the both procedures, but 2-year follow-up showed that LGCP is worse than LSG as a restrictive procedure for weight loss.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00464-015-4373-9

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 30 · Cited by 37

Authors
Grubnik, V. V., Ospanov, O. B., Namaeva, K. A., Medvedev, O. V., & Kresyun, M. S.
Affiliations
  • Odessa National Medical University (UA)
  • Astana Medical University (KZ)
Corresponding author
Grubnik, V. V.
Venue
Surgical Endoscopy
Published
2015-11-05
Volume
30
Issue
6
Pages
2186-2191
ISSN
  • 0930-2794 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-2218
OpenAlex
W2229983850
Cited by
37
References
30
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
3.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Surgical Endoscopy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Body Contouring and Surgery
Keywords
laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, restrictive bariatric surgery, morbid obesity, excess weight loss, long-term surgical outcomes, appetite loss, diabetes remission, sleep apnea, hypertension, operative time, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, greater curvature of stomach
MeSH terms
Adult, Appetite, Feasibility Studies, Female, Gastrectomy, Humans, Length of Stay, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Morbid, Laparoscopy, Postoperative Complications, Prospective Studies, Gastroplasty, Weight Loss, Comorbidity, Treatment Outcome, Operative Time

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review