| Title |
Fluid-Filled Versus Gas-Filled Intragastric Balloons as Obesity Interventions: a Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Obesity Surgery, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11695-018-3227-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fateh Bazerbachi, Samir Haffar, Tarek Sawas, Eric J. Vargas, Ravinder Jeet Kaur, Zhen Wang, Larry J. Prokop, M. Hassan Murad, Barham K. Abu Dayyeh |
| Abstract |
Four commercially available intragastric balloons have been used for the management of obesity and underwent randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and we aimed to compare them using a network meta-analysis approach. Several databases were queried from inception to May 26, 2017, and we included RCTs enrolling patients treated with Orbera, Heliosphere, ReShape Duo, and Obalon compared with another balloon, sham, or open-label control group. Two investigators independently abstracted data. A random effects frequentist network meta-analysis and relative ranking of agents using surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities were performed. We included 15 trials at low risk of bias (only two were head-to-head). Compared to control groups, the two fluid-filled devices were associated with significant outcome (% total body weight loss) at 6 months: Orbera, 6.72% (95% CI, 5.55, 7.89) and ReShape Duo 4% (95% CI 2.69, 5.31). Only one of the two gas-filled devices was associated with significant outcome at 6 months: Obalon 3.3% (95% CI 2.30, 4.30), and not the second: Heliosphere 6.71% (95% CI - 0.82, 14.23). Fluid-filled devices had the highest likelihood of superiority in achieving the outcome at 6 months (96.8%) and at 12 months (96.6%). The quality of evidence was high for comparisons against control. Fluid-filled balloons are more likely to produce weight loss compared to gas-filled balloons or lifestyle intervention. However, they may be associated with a higher rate of intolerance and early removal. This information will aid clinicians in device selection and engaging patients in shared decision-making. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Librarian | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 18% |
| Unknown | 18 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 April 2022.
All research outputs
#2,102,720
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Obesity Surgery
#199
of 3,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,247
of 296,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Obesity Surgery
#4
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,410 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 296,868 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.