Weight loss with or without intragastric balloon causes divergent effects on ghrelin cell expression

Mathus-Vliegen, Elisabeth M. H.; Spångéus, Anna; Walter, Susanna; Ericson, Ann‐Charlott

doi:10.1002/osp4.478

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our study design, we have opted for the use of LSG specimens as a comparison group in order to investigate ghrelin expression based on the advantage of analyzing full-thickness gastric mucosa, being aware at the same time that this pathological state is considered to be unassociated with GISTs (2). In spite of plasma ghrelin levels being decreased in patients with obesity [66,67], the current body of knowledge reports similar levels of expression of GhrC in obese vs. non-obese control patients [68][69][70][71].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

GIST and Ghrelin: To Be or Not to Be?

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Ghrelin is the orexigenic hormone secreted mainly by the stomach. Its involvement in neoplastic development has been studied in gastrointestinal adenocarcinomas. Our paper aims to evaluate the influence of the ghrelin axis in gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). Materials and Methods: The study design included two groups of patients, 46 with gastric GISTs and 30 with obesity. Archived tissue samples were evaluated for the presence of gastritis and H. pylori. Immunohistochemical expression of ghrelin and its receptor (GHS-R) was assessed. Results: All GISTs showed absent immunohistochemical expression for ghrelin, while GHS-R displayed a particular pattern, with notable differences in intensity (p = 0.0256) and percentage of stained cells (p < 0.00001) in the periphery vs. core of tumors. Positive ghrelin expression was lower in the gastric mucosa of the first group compared to the second group (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The ghrelin axis can influence GISTs carcinogenesis through activation of GHS-R. A previously described direct autocrine/paracrine mechanism is not supported by our findings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

GIST and Ghrelin: To Be or Not to Be?

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The principle of this technology is that the IGB occupies space within the stomach, resulting in a sensation of early satiety. Although the mechanism of action remains poorly understood, it appears to be related to hormonal changes and changes in gastrointestinal motility [11][12][13]. Contact between the IGB and the gastric fundus has been considered to be partially responsible for the success of the treatment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gastric Emptying and Its Correlation With Weight Loss and Body Mass Index in Patients With an Intragastric Balloon: A Prospective Study With Six Years of Follow-Up

Barrichello¹,

Ribeiro²,

Souza³

et al. 2022

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundObesity is the most well-established and prolonged pandemic in modern society. Having a better understanding of the available tools is important to improve weight loss and make the strategies more productive. This study aims to evaluate the effect of intragastric balloon (IGB) on gastric emptying time, its relationship with weight loss after IGB removal, and weight maintenance after six years. MethodologyThis prospective study analyzed data from patients undergoing IGB placement. A six-years follow-up was performed and data about weight maintenance were collected. We analyzed the impact of the IGB on gastrointestinal motility and its correlation with weight loss. ResultsOf the 20 patients included in the study, 52.4% were diagnosed with class I obesity and 47.6% with class II obesity. The mean weight of the patients was 96.5 ± 11.9 kg at baseline, 79.6 ± 11.4 kg at the time of IGB removal, 81.8 ± 9.1 kg at six months, and 93.2 ± 14.3 kg six years after IGB removal. The mean difference between the initial weight and that measured immediately after IGB removal was 16.68 ± 5.71 kg. Regarding gastric emptying time, there was a difference in retention on comparing the measurement before balloon placement to that after the balloon was in place (72.9% vs. 86.8%) after one hour of food intake. Comparing two hours after food intake, patients before IGB placement had a 30.6% food retention, while patients with IGB in place had a 69.2% retention. ConclusionsIn patients with class I or II obesity, the use of an IGB delayed gastric emptying of foods but showed no direct correlation with weight loss. Weight loss achieved after IGB placement was maintained in half of the patients at a six-year follow-up.

show abstract

“…Therefore, endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies have emerged over the years, to provide less invasive options beyond lifestyle modifications, pharmacotherapy and surgery, for patients who have failed with conservative treatment and are not or not yet surgical candidates, or refuse surgery because of its invasiveness and fear of complications[ 12 , 18 ]. According to the Statements after the Brazilian Intragastric Balloon Consensus, held in Sao Paulo, Brazil, in June 2016, obese individuals who are candidates for balloon implantation must be over 12 years of age, with established puberty, while there is no maximum age limit, each patient being evaluated individually.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mathus-Vliegen et al [ 18 ] who have been studying their mode of action for more than a decade, consider IGBs to mediate satiety both peripherally, by being a physical impediment to food intake, by reducing the gastric capacity and by delaying gastric emptying, and centrally, by activating gastric stretch receptors that transmit signals via afferent vagal nerves, the solitary tract and paraventricular nuclei, to the ventromedial and lateral hypothalamus[ 21 - 23 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Six intragastric balloons: Which to choose?

Stavrou¹,

Shrewsbury²,

Kotzampassi³

2021

WJGE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Endoscopically placed intragastric balloons (IGBs) have played a significant role in obesity treatment over the last 30 years, successfully bridging the gap between lifestyle modification/pharmacotherapy and bariatric surgery. Since they provide a continuous sensation of satiety that helps the ingestion of smaller portions of food, facilitating maintenance of a low-calorie diet, they have generally been considered an effective and reversible, less invasive, non-surgical procedure for weight loss. However, some studies indicate that balloons have limited sustainable effectiveness for the vast majority attempting such therapy, resulting in a return to the previous weight after balloon removal. In this review we try to summarize the pros and cons of various balloon types, to guide decision making for both the physician and the obese individual looking for effective treatment. We analyzed the six most commonly used IGBs, namely the liquid-filled balloons Orbera, Spatz3, ReShape Duo and Elipse, and the gas-filled Heliosphere and Obalon - also including comments on the adjustable Spatz3, and the swallowable Obalon and Elipse - to optimize the choice for maximum efficacy and safety.

show abstract

Weight loss with or without intragastric balloon causes divergent effects on ghrelin cell expression

Cited by 6 publications

References 46 publications

GIST and Ghrelin: To Be or Not to Be?

GIST and Ghrelin: To Be or Not to Be?

Gastric Emptying and Its Correlation With Weight Loss and Body Mass Index in Patients With an Intragastric Balloon: A Prospective Study With Six Years of Follow-Up

Six intragastric balloons: Which to choose?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About