The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Systematic review of innovation reporting in endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty

Systematic review of innovation reporting in endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty
Systematic review of innovation reporting in endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty

Background: endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a novel endoscopic procedure used to treat obesity-related comorbidities. Whilst its use is increasing in clinical practice, there is comparatively little understanding about how it has been evaluated. This study aimed to systematically summarize and appraise the reporting of ESG in the context of guidelines for evaluating innovative surgical devices and procedures. 

Methods: systematic searches were used to identify all published studies reporting ESG insertion. Data collected included patient selection, governance arrangements, proceduralist expertise, technique description and outcome reporting. 

Results: searches identified 2289 abstracts; 37 full-text papers were included (one prospective comparative cohort study, 16 retrospective cohort studies, 17 prospective cohort studies and three case reports). No randomized trials were identified. Eighteen studies were conducted prospectively. The number of patients in the included studies ranged from 1 to 1000. The lower BMI limit ranged from 27 to 35 kg/m2. Research approvals were reported in 26 studies. Two studies reported on the learning curve. All studies reported some aspect of technical implementation, but many variations were noted. Suturing device used and suture pattern were the most commonly reported aspects (32 studies). Follow-up ranged from 1 to 24 months, but was 12 months or less in 28 studies. Forty-eight different outcomes were reported across all studies. 

Conclusion: the literature on ESG has demonstrated some progression in reporting and analysis and the next stage of assessment should be a randomized controlled trial to demonstrate efficacy. Graphical abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.]

Endoscopy, Obesity, Patient selection, Prospective studies, Retrospective studies
0960-8923
2962-2978
Currie, Andrew C.
1dff38fc-817f-4106-8a0b-31fe61866e0d
Glaysher, Michael A.
965e02e5-5f16-4173-a507-2423fce132ad
Blencowe, Natalie S.
58263bc0-93c7-422a-bee5-bde4fe408493
Kelly, Jamie
d17b4f9b-1370-4e6f-bdca-fa9171e29c6a
Currie, Andrew C.
1dff38fc-817f-4106-8a0b-31fe61866e0d
Glaysher, Michael A.
965e02e5-5f16-4173-a507-2423fce132ad
Blencowe, Natalie S.
58263bc0-93c7-422a-bee5-bde4fe408493
Kelly, Jamie
d17b4f9b-1370-4e6f-bdca-fa9171e29c6a

Currie, Andrew C., Glaysher, Michael A., Blencowe, Natalie S. and Kelly, Jamie (2021) Systematic review of innovation reporting in endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty. Obesity Surgery, 31 (7), 2962-2978. (doi:10.1007/s11695-021-05355-4).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background: endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a novel endoscopic procedure used to treat obesity-related comorbidities. Whilst its use is increasing in clinical practice, there is comparatively little understanding about how it has been evaluated. This study aimed to systematically summarize and appraise the reporting of ESG in the context of guidelines for evaluating innovative surgical devices and procedures. 

Methods: systematic searches were used to identify all published studies reporting ESG insertion. Data collected included patient selection, governance arrangements, proceduralist expertise, technique description and outcome reporting. 

Results: searches identified 2289 abstracts; 37 full-text papers were included (one prospective comparative cohort study, 16 retrospective cohort studies, 17 prospective cohort studies and three case reports). No randomized trials were identified. Eighteen studies were conducted prospectively. The number of patients in the included studies ranged from 1 to 1000. The lower BMI limit ranged from 27 to 35 kg/m2. Research approvals were reported in 26 studies. Two studies reported on the learning curve. All studies reported some aspect of technical implementation, but many variations were noted. Suturing device used and suture pattern were the most commonly reported aspects (32 studies). Follow-up ranged from 1 to 24 months, but was 12 months or less in 28 studies. Forty-eight different outcomes were reported across all studies. 

Conclusion: the literature on ESG has demonstrated some progression in reporting and analysis and the next stage of assessment should be a randomized controlled trial to demonstrate efficacy. Graphical abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.]

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 16 March 2021
Published date: 27 March 2021
Additional Information: Funding Information: This study was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. Publisher Copyright: © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature. Copyright: Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
Keywords: Endoscopy, Obesity, Patient selection, Prospective studies, Retrospective studies

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 450408
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/450408
ISSN: 0960-8923
PURE UUID: ab08ab45-1437-4b07-ba43-f6048f005908

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 27 Jul 2021 17:24
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 12:46

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Andrew C. Currie
Author: Michael A. Glaysher
Author: Natalie S. Blencowe
Author: Jamie Kelly

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×