Air-filled vs water-filled intragastric balloon: a prospective randomized study

Area of Science:

• Bariatric Surgery
• Gastroenterology
• Obesity Medicine

Background:

• Intragastric balloons offer a reversible, temporary treatment for morbid obesity.
• Both saline-filled and air-filled balloons are available therapeutic options.
• Comparative studies are needed to evaluate their efficacy and safety.

Purpose of the Study:

• To prospectively compare saline-filled (Bioenterics Intragastric Balloon - BIB) and air-filled (Endobag-Heliosphere) balloons.
• Evaluate differences in weight loss parameters, safety, and patient tolerance.
• Assess the suitability of air-filled balloons as an alternative obesity treatment.

Main Methods:

• A prospective study randomized 60 morbidly obese patients into two groups (n=30 each).
• Group A received the saline-filled BIB (500 ml), and Group B received the air-filled Heliosphere (950 ml).
• Weight loss (BMI, %EWL), safety, and tolerance were assessed, with statistical analysis using t-test, Fisher exact, and chi-squared tests.

Main Results:

• Both balloons demonstrated comparable weight loss outcomes (mean %EWL: 20% vs. 18%; mean BMI reduction: 40.8 vs. 41.9).
• The air-filled balloon group experienced significantly longer extraction times and greater patient discomfort.
• Difficulties during removal were attributed to the cardia and lower pharynx passage.

Conclusions:

• Air-filled balloons represent a potential alternative for temporary obesity management.
• Improvements in device design are necessary to enhance patient compliance during removal.
• Addressing issues like spontaneous deflations and extraction difficulties is crucial for wider adoption.