Safety and Effectiveness of Two Different Fluid-Filled Intragastric Balloons: A Single Center Experience.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Obesity Surgery Pub Date : 2024-10-02 DOI:10.1007/s11695-024-07524-7
Mohsen Alhashemi, Ahmed Alkhamis, Mohammad Jamal, Husain Almahmeed, Fatima Hamshari, Carol Dsouza, Sara Al-Hassani, Ahmed Almousawi, Wafaa Qasem
{"title":"Safety and Effectiveness of Two Different Fluid-Filled Intragastric Balloons: A Single Center Experience.","authors":"Mohsen Alhashemi, Ahmed Alkhamis, Mohammad Jamal, Husain Almahmeed, Fatima Hamshari, Carol Dsouza, Sara Al-Hassani, Ahmed Almousawi, Wafaa Qasem","doi":"10.1007/s11695-024-07524-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of the study is to compare weight loss and safety outcomes of two different commonly available fluid-filled intragastric balloons (IGBs) used for weight loss.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database of adult patients who underwent IGB insertion between July 2020 and November 2021 in a single private clinic in Kuwait. The patient either received the Elipse™ or Orbera365™ balloon and was followed until the end of treatment.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>A total of 358 patients were included, of which 265 and 93 each received the Elipse and Orbera365 balloons, respectively. The mean age of patients was 32.8 (SD 9), the mean body mass index (BMI) was 35 kg/m<sup>2</sup> (SD 4.8), and 72.1% of patients were female. In the Elipse group, 254 patients completed treatment, and 84 patients completed the treatment with Orbera365. Weight loss outcomes were measured at the end of treatment: 4 months after Elipse insertion, and 12 months after Orbera365 insertion. Interim 4 months weight loss outcomes were also measured for the Orbera365 balloon. Patients in the Orbera365 group had significantly better total body weight loss (%TBWL, 14.7 kg [SD 8.9]) compared to the Elipse group (%TBWL 10 kg, [SD 5.6], p ≤ 0.0001) at the end of treatment, while there was no difference in weight loss outcomes between the two balloons at 4 months. There were more complications requiring premature balloon removal in the Orbera365 group (9.7%) compared to the Elipse group (3.4%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>IGBs provide significant weight loss with an acceptable safety profile. The Orbera365 ballon shows better weight loss outcomes compared to the Elipse, likely due to longer duration of treatment. However, there was a higher rate of complications requiring premature balloon removal in the Orbera365 group. Studies with larger patient cohort is needed to verify the findings of this study.</p>","PeriodicalId":19460,"journal":{"name":"Obesity Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obesity Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-024-07524-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the study is to compare weight loss and safety outcomes of two different commonly available fluid-filled intragastric balloons (IGBs) used for weight loss.

Method: A retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database of adult patients who underwent IGB insertion between July 2020 and November 2021 in a single private clinic in Kuwait. The patient either received the Elipse™ or Orbera365™ balloon and was followed until the end of treatment.

Result: A total of 358 patients were included, of which 265 and 93 each received the Elipse and Orbera365 balloons, respectively. The mean age of patients was 32.8 (SD 9), the mean body mass index (BMI) was 35 kg/m2 (SD 4.8), and 72.1% of patients were female. In the Elipse group, 254 patients completed treatment, and 84 patients completed the treatment with Orbera365. Weight loss outcomes were measured at the end of treatment: 4 months after Elipse insertion, and 12 months after Orbera365 insertion. Interim 4 months weight loss outcomes were also measured for the Orbera365 balloon. Patients in the Orbera365 group had significantly better total body weight loss (%TBWL, 14.7 kg [SD 8.9]) compared to the Elipse group (%TBWL 10 kg, [SD 5.6], p ≤ 0.0001) at the end of treatment, while there was no difference in weight loss outcomes between the two balloons at 4 months. There were more complications requiring premature balloon removal in the Orbera365 group (9.7%) compared to the Elipse group (3.4%).

Conclusion: IGBs provide significant weight loss with an acceptable safety profile. The Orbera365 ballon shows better weight loss outcomes compared to the Elipse, likely due to longer duration of treatment. However, there was a higher rate of complications requiring premature balloon removal in the Orbera365 group. Studies with larger patient cohort is needed to verify the findings of this study.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
两种不同充液胃内球囊的安全性和有效性:单中心经验。
研究目的本研究旨在比较两种用于减肥的常见胃内充液球囊(IGB)的减肥效果和安全性:方法:对 2020 年 7 月至 2021 年 11 月期间在科威特一家私人诊所接受 IGB 植入术的成年患者进行回顾性队列研究。患者接受 Elipse™ 或 Orbera365™ 球囊,并随访至治疗结束:结果:共纳入 358 名患者,其中分别有 265 名和 93 名患者接受了 Elipse 和 Orbera365 球囊治疗。患者的平均年龄为 32.8 岁(SD 9),平均体重指数(BMI)为 35 kg/m2(SD 4.8),72.1% 的患者为女性。在 Elipse 组中,254 名患者完成了治疗,84 名患者完成了 Orbera365 治疗。减肥效果在治疗结束时进行测量:分别在植入 Elipse 4 个月和 Orbera365 12 个月后进行。此外,还对 Orbera365 球囊的 4 个月中期减肥效果进行了测量。在治疗结束时,Orbera365 组患者的总体重减轻率(%TBWL,14.7 千克 [SD 8.9])明显优于 Elipse 组(%TBWL 10 千克,[SD 5.6],p ≤ 0.0001),而在 4 个月时,两种球囊的体重减轻效果没有差异。与 Elipse 组(3.4%)相比,Orbera365 组(9.7%)需要提前移除球囊的并发症更多:结论:IGB 可显著减轻体重,且安全性可接受。与 Elipse 相比,Orbera365 气球的减肥效果更好,这可能是因为治疗时间更长。不过,在 Orbera365 组中,需要过早取出球囊的并发症发生率较高。要验证这项研究的结果,还需要对更大的患者群体进行研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Obesity Surgery
Obesity Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
24.10%
发文量
567
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Obesity Surgery is the official journal of the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and metabolic disorders (IFSO). A journal for bariatric/metabolic surgeons, Obesity Surgery provides an international, interdisciplinary forum for communicating the latest research, surgical and laparoscopic techniques, for treatment of massive obesity and metabolic disorders. Topics covered include original research, clinical reports, current status, guidelines, historical notes, invited commentaries, letters to the editor, medicolegal issues, meeting abstracts, modern surgery/technical innovations, new concepts, reviews, scholarly presentations and opinions. Obesity Surgery benefits surgeons performing obesity/metabolic surgery, general surgeons and surgical residents, endoscopists, anesthetists, support staff, nurses, dietitians, psychiatrists, psychologists, plastic surgeons, internists including endocrinologists and diabetologists, nutritional scientists, and those dealing with eating disorders.
期刊最新文献
Correction: A Longer Biliopancreatic Limb and Shorter Common Channel Enhance Weight Loss But May Have Harmful Effects in Mouse Models of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass. Use of Probiotics and Synbiotics in the Treatment of Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth (SIBO) and Other Gastrointestinal Symptoms After Metabolic Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Further Exploration of Calibration Tube Usage in Sleeve Gastrectomy: Balancing Technology and Practice. Time to Put LDL Cholesterol on the Roadmap in Bariatric Surgery Guidelines. Applying the Principles of Trauma-Informed Care to the Evaluation and Management of Patients Who Undergo Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1