Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty: the "cable" technique.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Platt KD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8118129 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Obesity and its complications, such as type 2 diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, nonalcoholic fatty liver, are serious global public health problems. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) can reduce the length and width of the stomach by simulating the anatomical structure of surgical sleeve gastrectomy to reduce the capacity of the stomach, and is safe and effective to reduce weight. ESG has the advantages of non- invasiveness, no gastrectomy, repeatability, simple operation, no incision scar, few complications, short hospital stay and quick postoperative recovery. As an intermediate means of medical treatment and surgery, ESG provides a new method for weight loss for obese patients who cannot tolerate or are unwilling to undergo surgery. Herein we trace the origin of ESG, analyze the unique advantages of ESG suture, explore the technical improvement in the development of ESG, and briefly describe the weight reduction effect of ESG and compare the curative effect of ESG with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. ESG has undergone rapid development and maturity but also faces such challenges as the lack of established standard procedures, unclear weight reduction mechanism, and clarification of the indications for operation. Still, ESG is expected to become the mainstream technique for weight reduction.
| S-EPMC7321269 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6545096 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceObesity is a disease with a large socioeconomic burden. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a minimally invasive endoscopic bariatric procedure with wide global adoption. More recently, new weight-loss medications, such as glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (eg, semaglutide), have attracted increased attention due to their efficacy. However, their cost-effectiveness over an extended period compared with ESG is a critical gap that needs to be better explored for informed health care decision-making.ObjectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of semaglutide compared with ESG over 5 years for individuals with class II obesity.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation study, conducted from September 1, 2022, to May 31, 2023, used a Markov cohort model to compare ESG and semaglutide, with a no-treatment baseline strategy. The study comprised adult patients in the US health care system with class II obesity (body mass index [BMI] of 35-39.9). The base case was a 45-year-old patient with class II obesity (BMI of 37). Patients undergoing ESG were subjected to risks of perioperative mortality and adverse events with resultant costs and decrement in quality of life.InterventionsStrategies included treatment with semaglutide and ESG.Main outcomes and measuresCosts (2022 US dollars), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000/QALY. A 5-year time horizon with a cycle length of 1 month with a 3% discount rate was used. Probabilities, costs, and quality-of-life estimates of the model were derived from published literature. One-way, 2-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also performed.ResultsThe model found that ESG was more cost-effective than semaglutide over a 5-year time horizon, with an ICER of -$595 532/QALY. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty added 0.06 QALYs and reduced total cost by $33 583 relative to semaglutide. The results remained robust on 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty sustained greater weight loss over 5 years vs semaglutide (BMI of 31.7 vs 33.0). To achieve nondominance, the annual price of semaglutide, currently $13 618, would need to be $3591.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that ESG is cost saving compared with semaglutide in the treatment of class II obesity. On price threshold analyses, a 3-fold decrease in the price of semaglutide is needed to achieve nondominance.
| S-EPMC11015347 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBariatric endoscopic techniques are minimally invasive and induce gastric volume reduction to treat obesity. Aim : To evaluate endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (Apollo method) using a suturing method directed at the greater curvature, as well as the perioperative care, two year safety and weight loss.MethodProspective single-center study over 154 patients (108 females) using the endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty procedure under general anesthesia with overnight inpatient observation. Of the154 initial patients, 143 were available for 1-month of follow-up, 133 for 6-month, 64 for 12-month and 28 completed the 24 month assessment. Follow-up was carried out by a multidisciplinary team (nutritionist and psychologist). Outcomes evaluated were: change in BMI; change in body weight (TBWL); % of loss of initial body weight (%TBWL); % of excess body weight loss (%EWL) (segregated in > or <25% and adverse effects. Voluntary oral contrasted radiological examinations were scheduled to assess the gastroplasty at different times post-procedure.ResultsMean age was 44.9 (23-69) years. At 24 months after the procedure baseline mean BMI change from 38.3 to 30.8 kg/m2. TBWL, %TBWL and %EWL were of 21.3 kg, 19.5% and 60.4% respectively. 85.7% of patients achieve the goal of >25% %EWL. There were no mayor adverse events intraprocedure or during the 24 months of follow-up .ConclusionEndoscopic sleeve gastroplasty with regular monitoring by a multidisciplinary team can be considered an effective, safe and well tolerated procedure for obesity treatment, at least for two years of follow-up.
| S-EPMC5424680 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aimsBariatric endoscopy has emerged as an aid in the nonsurgical treatment of obesity. The objective of this study is to critically provide the results and follow-up of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty 1 year after the procedure.Patients and methodsProspective single-center follow-up study of 25 patients (5 men, 20 women) who underwent flexible endoscopic suturing for endoluminal gastric volume reduction. A multidisciplinary team provided post-procedure care. Patient outcomes were recorded at 1 year after the procedure. Linear regression analysis was done to evaluate the variables associated with best results at 1 year of follow-up.ResultsMean body mass index (BMI) was 38.5 ± 4.6 kg/m(2) (range 30 - 47) and mean age 44.5 ± 8.2 years (range 29 - 60). At 1 year, 22 patients continued with the follow-up (2 dropped out at 6 months and 1 at 3 months). There were no major intra-procedural, early, or delayed adverse events. Mean BMI loss was 7.3 ± 4.2 kg/m(2), and mean percentage of total body weight loss was 18.7 ± 10.7 at 1 year. In the linear regression analysis, adjusted by initial BMI, variables associated with %TBWL involved the frequency of nutritional (β = 0.563, P = 0.014) and psychological contacts (β = 0.727, P = 0.025). The number of nutritional and psychological contacts were predictive of good weight loss results.ConclusionsEndoscopic sleeve gastroplasty is a feasible, reproducible, and effective procedure to treat obesity. Nutritional and psychological interaction are predictive of success.
| S-EPMC4751018 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aims Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is performed in clinical practice by gastroenterologists and bariatric surgeons. Given the increasing regulatory approval and global adoption, we aimed to evaluate real-world outcomes in multidisciplinary practices involving bariatric surgeons and gastroenterologists across the United States. Patients and methods We included adult patients with obesity who underwent ESG from January 2013 to August 2022 in seven academic and private centers in the United States. Patient and procedure characteristics, serious adverse events (SAEs), and weight loss outcomes up to 24 months were analyzed. SPSS (version 29.0) was used for all statistical analyses. Results A total of 1506 patients from seven sites included 235 (15.6%) treated by surgeons and 1271 (84.4%) treated by gastroenterologists. There were no baseline differences between groups. Gastroenterologists used argon plasma coagulation for marking significantly more often than surgeons ( P <0.001). Surgeons placed sutures in the fundus in all instances whereas gastroenterologist placed them in the fundus in less than 1% of the cases ( P <0.001>). Procedure times were significantly different between groups, with surgeons requiring approximately 20 minutes more during the procedure than gastroenterologists ( P <0.001). Percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) and percent responders achieving >10 and >15% TBWL were similar between the two groups at 12, 18, and 24 months. Rates of SAEs were low and similar at 1.7% for surgeons and 2.7% for gastroenterologists ( P >0.05). Conclusions Data from a large US cohort show significant and sustained weight loss with ESG and an excellent safety profile in both bariatric surgery and gastroenterology practices, supporting the scalability of the procedure across practices in a multidisciplinary setting.
| S-EPMC10898995 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Endoluminal treatments such as endoscopic gastroplasty have been gaining ground in obesity treatment. A 52-year-old woman gained weight 5 months after endoscopic gastroplasty. Thus, it was decided to resuture the greater curvature of the stomach 8 months after the initial procedure by reducing the gastric pouch even further. The patient lost 16% of her total body weight with this procedure. Endoscopic gastroplasty, which can be reperformed in patients who regain weight, reach a plateau, or do not achieve the initial planned weight loss, is an effective and safe first-line obesity treatment.
| S-EPMC6658061 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and the incisionless endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) weight loss procedures require further investigation of their efficacy, safety and patient-centered outcomes in the Australian setting.MethodsThe aim was to examine the 6- and 12-month weight loss efficacy, safety, and weight-related quality of life (QoL) of adults with obesity who received the ESG or LSG bariatric procedure with 12+ months of adjuvant multidisciplinary pre- and postprocedural support. Data were from a two-arm prospective cohort study that followed patients from baseline to 12-months postprocedure from a medical center in Queensland. Percent excess weight loss (%EWL) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were body composition (fat mass, fat-free mass, android:gynoid ratio, bone mineral content) via dual energy X-ray absorptiometry, weight-related QoL, lipid, glycemic, and hepatic biochemistry, and adverse events.Results16 ESG (19% attrition; 81.2% female; aged:41.4 (SD: 10.4) years; BMI: 35.5 (SD: 5.2) kg/m2) and 45 LSG (9% attrition; 84.4% female; aged:40.4 (SD: 9.0) years; BMI: 40.7 (SD: 5.6) kg/m2) participants were recruited. At 12-months postprocedure, ESG %EWL was 57% (SD: 32%; p < 0.01) and LSG %EWL was 79% (SD: 24%; p < 0.001). ESG and LSG cohorts improved QoL (19.8% in ESG [p > 0.05]; 48.1% in LSG [p < 0.05]), liver function (AST: - 4.4 U/L in ESG [p < 0.05]; - 2.7 U/L in LSG [p < 0.05]), HbA1c (- 0.5% in ESG [p < 0.05]; - 0.1% in LSG [p < 0.05]) and triglycerides (- 0.6 mmol/L in ESG [p > 0.05]; - 0.4 mmol/L in LSG [P < 0.05]) at 12-months. Both cohorts reduced fat mass (p < 0.05). The ESG maintained but LSG decreased fat-free mass at 6-months (p < 0.05); and both cohorts lost fat-free mass at 12-months (p < 0.05). There were no adverse events directly related to the procedure. The ESG reported 25% mild-moderate adverse events possibly related to the procedure, and the LSG reported 27% mild-severe adverse events possibly related to the procedure.ConclusionsIn this setting, the ESG and LSG were safe and effective weight loss treatments for obese adults alongside multidisciplinary support. Patients who elected the ESG maintained fat-free mass at 6-months but both cohorts lost fat-free mass at 12-months postprocedure. Patients who elected the LSG had large and significant improvements to weight-related quality of life. Further well-powered studies are required to confirm these findings.Trial registrationThis study was registered prospectively at the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry on 06/03/2018, Registration Number ACTRN12618000337279 .
| S-EPMC8817771 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveEndoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) has gained global adoption but our understanding of its mechanism(s) of action and durability of efficacy is limited. We sought to determine changes in gastric emptying (GE), gastric motility (GM), hormones and eating behaviours after ESG.DesignA priori-designed single-centre substudy of a large US randomised clinical trial, adults with obesity were randomised to ESG or lifestyle interventions (LS) alone. We measured GE, hormones and weight loss and assessed eating behaviours. In a subset of ESG patients, we assessed GM. The primary outcome was the change in T1/2 (min) at 3 months, and secondary outcomes were changes in weight, GE, GM, hormones and eating behaviours. We used t-test analyses and regression to determine the association between GE and weight loss.Results36 (ESG=18; LS=18) participated in this substudy. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. At 3 months, T1/2 was delayed in the ESG group (n=17) compared with the LS group (n=17) (152.3±47.3 vs 89.1±27.9; p<0.001). At 12 months, T1/2 remained delayed in the ESG group (n=16) vs control group (n=14) (137±37.4 vs 90.1±23.4; p<0.001). Greater delays in GE at 3 months were associated with greater weight loss. GM was preserved and fasting ghrelin, glucagon-like peptide 1 and polypeptide YY significantly increased 18 months after ESG.ConclusionESG promotes weight loss through several key mechanistic pathways involving GE and hormones while preserving GM. These findings further support clinical adoption of this technique for the management of obesity.Trial registration numberNCT03406975.
| S-EPMC10102256 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6731375 | biostudies-literature