BioEnterics Intragastric Balloon (BIB) versus Spatz Adjustable Balloon System (ABS): Our experience in the elderly

Russo, Teresa; Aprea, Giovanni; Formisano, Cesare; Ruggiero, Simona; Quarto, Gennaro; Serra, Raffaele; Massa, G; Sivero, Luigi

doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.06.013

Cited by 20 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Using the Orbera ® device, the early removal rate was 16.7% (median 8 weeks) associated with use of selective serotonin or serotonin‐norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, and with average weight loss of 8.5% (3 months), 11.8% (6 months), and 13.3% (9 months) and significant reduction of lipid and glycemic status markers at 6 months . Other balloon products (e.g., BioEnterics ® and End‐ball ® [nonadjustable] , Spatz Balloon ® [adjustable], and Elipse Balloon ® [a procedureless device that is swallowed]) are not FDA approved at this time but function similarly as other space‐occupying devices within the stomach. Medications that reduce nausea and production of gastric acid are frequently used concomitantly .…”

Section: Executive Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Perioperative Nutrition, Metabolic, and Nonsurgical Support of Patients Undergoing Bariatric Procedures – 2019 Update: Cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

Mechanick

Apovian

Brethauer

et al. 2020

Obesity

326

464

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists. Methods Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts. Results New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity‐based chronic disease complications‐centric model, nuance‐based and algorithm/checklist‐assisted clinical decision‐making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest). Conclusions Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher‐risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision‐making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

show abstract

Section: Executive Summarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Perioperative Nutrition, Metabolic, and Nonsurgical Support of Patients Undergoing Bariatric Procedures – 2019 Update: Cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

Mechanick

Apovian

Brethauer

et al. 2020

Obesity

326

464

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Russo et al compared the Spatz Adjustable Balloon with the BioEnterics Intragastric Balloon (BIB), also known as Orbera TM [ 29 ]. In their case-control study, they compared the weight loss outcome, weight maintenance after removal, and short- and medium-term complications and found that there were no differences in these parameters observed between the two balloons [ 29 ]. However, long-term safety issues of severe complications and high mortality have been reported [ 30 ].…”

Section: Spatz Balloonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Various Intragastric Balloons Under Clinical Investigation

Choi

2018

Clin Endosc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Obesity is a chronic disease with an exponentially increasing incidence rate, and its negative effects are well documented in numerous studies. As a result, the importance of bariatric therapy cannot be overemphasized, and many bariatric treatment methods with varying mechanisms have been developed. Of the available treatment methods, intragastric balloons, introduced in the 1980s, have been shown to be a safe and effective treatment modality; various intragastric balloon products have been developed and are currently being widely used in clinical settings. However, the disadvantages of intragastric balloons, such as unclear long-term weight loss benefits and complications experienced during insertion and removal, preclude their wider use. In this review, we discuss different intragastric balloon products, focusing on those under clinical investigation, and suggest future research directions.

show abstract

“…From January 2010 to December 2012, 20 patients underwent implantation of the intragastric balloon in our Department of Digestive Endoscopy. Patients were selected according to NIH criteria [ 13 ]. Inclusion criteria were: BMI > 27-30, previous failure of dietary measures and the presence of at least one of the following co-morbidities: hypertension, diabetes, respiratory disorders, osteoarthropathy, dyslipidaemia.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…BIB was placed in 20 patients (9 males, 11 females; age range: 19-57 years), BMI range: 37-46, weight range: 103-165 kg [ 13 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morbid Obesity: treatment with Bioenterics Intragastric Balloon (BIB), psychological and nursing care: our experience

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractObesity is considered a chronic disease, difficult to treat, and is the first cause of death in the world that is predictable. The surgical approach is limited to patients with severe obesity but there is an intermediate group who are not candidates for immediate surgery. The BioEnterics Intragastric Balloon (BIB) is recommended for weight reduction as a bridge to bariatric surgery.All patients in the study underwent a psychological evaluation prior to placement of the BIB.

show abstract

BioEnterics Intragastric Balloon (BIB) versus Spatz Adjustable Balloon System (ABS): Our experience in the elderly

Cited by 20 publications

References 13 publications

Various Intragastric Balloons Under Clinical Investigation

Morbid Obesity: treatment with Bioenterics Intragastric Balloon (BIB), psychological and nursing care: our experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About