Comparative Clinical Effectiveness and Operating Efficiency of Different Ultrasonic Devices for Performance of Sleeve Gastrectomy.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Obesity Surgery Pub Date : 2026-10-01 Epub Date: 2026-08-18 DOI:10.1007/s11695-026-08892-y
Misra Monali, I-Wen Pan, Zasim Azar Siddqui, Frank Bisceglie, Matthew Kroh
{"title":"Comparative Clinical Effectiveness and Operating Efficiency of Different Ultrasonic Devices for Performance of Sleeve Gastrectomy.","authors":"Misra Monali, I-Wen Pan, Zasim Azar Siddqui, Frank Bisceglie, Matthew Kroh","doi":"10.1007/s11695-026-08892-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study aims to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes of using different ultrasonic energy devices in patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy (SG).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The patient cohort was extracted from PINC AI™ Healthcare Data 2019-2023, including individuals aged ≥ 18 who underwent primary elective gastric sleeve procedures using either corded (CD) or cordless (CL) ultrasonic devices (UD). Two analysis groups were evaluated: total SG regardless of the - stapler brand used in the operation (Cohort I), and UD used with an identifiable same-brand stapler in the operation (Cohort II). A propensity score matching (PSM) method with a caliper of 0.2 and 1:1 nearest-neighbor matching was performed for patients who used CD and CL. We applied multivariable generalized linear model (GLM) analyses for sensitivity analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>24160 and 18906 patients were included for cohorts I (82.3% CD and 17.7% CL; 4268 PSM paired) and II (81.7% CD and 18.3% CL; 3282 PSM paired), respectively. CD had higher operating-room time (minutes) than CL in both Cohort I (mean difference: 27 (95% confidence interval (CI): (24, 29), p < 0.001) and II (27 (24, 30), p < 0.001). There is no difference in incidence rates of blood transfusion, bleeding, and 30-day readmission, and total inpatient cost and length of stay between CD and CL. The sensitivity analyses showed similar results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study shows that CL had similar clinical and economic outcomes to CD, and CL was more efficient in patients treated with sleeve gastrectomy.</p><p><strong>Key points: </strong>• Cordless ultrasonic devices were more efficient when used in sleeve gastrectomy. • Outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy used cordless/corded ultrasonic device were similar. • Resource use of cordless/corded ultrasonic device was similar in sleeve gastrectomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":19460,"journal":{"name":"Obesity Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"5173-5182"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13645881/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obesity Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-026-08892-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This study aims to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes of using different ultrasonic energy devices in patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy (SG).

Methods: The patient cohort was extracted from PINC AI™ Healthcare Data 2019-2023, including individuals aged ≥ 18 who underwent primary elective gastric sleeve procedures using either corded (CD) or cordless (CL) ultrasonic devices (UD). Two analysis groups were evaluated: total SG regardless of the - stapler brand used in the operation (Cohort I), and UD used with an identifiable same-brand stapler in the operation (Cohort II). A propensity score matching (PSM) method with a caliper of 0.2 and 1:1 nearest-neighbor matching was performed for patients who used CD and CL. We applied multivariable generalized linear model (GLM) analyses for sensitivity analyses.

Results: 24160 and 18906 patients were included for cohorts I (82.3% CD and 17.7% CL; 4268 PSM paired) and II (81.7% CD and 18.3% CL; 3282 PSM paired), respectively. CD had higher operating-room time (minutes) than CL in both Cohort I (mean difference: 27 (95% confidence interval (CI): (24, 29), p < 0.001) and II (27 (24, 30), p < 0.001). There is no difference in incidence rates of blood transfusion, bleeding, and 30-day readmission, and total inpatient cost and length of stay between CD and CL. The sensitivity analyses showed similar results.

Conclusions: The study shows that CL had similar clinical and economic outcomes to CD, and CL was more efficient in patients treated with sleeve gastrectomy.

Key points: • Cordless ultrasonic devices were more efficient when used in sleeve gastrectomy. • Outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy used cordless/corded ultrasonic device were similar. • Resource use of cordless/corded ultrasonic device was similar in sleeve gastrectomy.

不同超声装置在袖式胃切除术中的临床效果及手术效率比较。
简介:本研究旨在评估不同超声能量装置在袖式胃切除术(SG)患者中的临床和经济效果。方法:从PINC AI™Healthcare Data 2019-2023中提取患者队列,包括年龄≥18岁、使用有绳(CD)或无绳(CL)超声装置(UD)接受初级选择性胃套管手术的患者。对两个分析组进行评估:无论手术中使用的订书机品牌如何,总SG(队列I)和手术中使用可识别的相同品牌订书机的UD(队列II)。采用倾向评分匹配(PSM)方法,卡尺为0.2,最近邻匹配为1:1。我们采用多变量广义线性模型(GLM)分析敏感性分析。结果:24160例和18906例患者分别被纳入队列I (82.3% CD和17.7% CL, 4268例PSM配对)和队列II (81.7% CD和18.3% CL, 3282例PSM配对)。在两个队列I中,CD的手术室时间(分钟)均高于CL(平均差值:27)(95%可信区间(CI): (24,29), p)。结论:研究表明CL与CD具有相似的临床和经济结果,并且CL在套管胃切除术患者中更有效。•无绳超声装置在袖式胃切除术中的应用效率更高。•使用无绳/有绳超声装置进行袖式胃切除术的结果相似。•无绳/有绳超声设备在袖式胃切除术中的资源利用相似。
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 求助全文
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.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书