Introduction: The Allurion® gastric balloon (AGB) is an innovative option for treating overweight individuals and those with grade I obesity, or as a bridging treatment for bariatric surgery, or for patients who do not desire surgical intervention. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the AGB in a multicentric cohort. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of consecutive cases treated with AGB (≥18 years old with body mass index [BMI] ≥27) was performed in eight centers in three countries in Latin America (Argentina, Chile, and Perú), between September 2021 and September 2022, with a 12-month follow-up. Results: In total, 402 patients were included (median BMI of 32.81 kg/m2). Mean total weight loss percentage was 8.3%, 11.6%, and 14.9% at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively, with a follow-up of 93.03%, 75.37%, and 40.54%. The adverse event rate was 1.24% (n = 5). During the first 7 days, 34.58% (n = 139) experienced concomitant symptoms, and 1.99% (n = 8) asked for endoscopic balloon extraction because of intolerance. The complication rate was 6.46% (n = 26). Readmission index was 4.97% (n = 20), and reintervention was 2.23% (n = 9). Balloon elimination was experienced by 5.7% of patients in the first 14 days, 29.10% (n = 117) before the third month, and 62.68% (n = 252) after the 16th week. Early deflation rate was 2.73% (n = 11). Digestive track elimination was perceived by 26.61%. Conclusions: AGB is a safe and effective option for the treatment of overweight and obesity in Latin America. Lifestyle changes and continuous support with a multidisciplinary team are essential to achieving good mid- to long-term outcomes.
Objectives. To evaluate the ability of the Risk Factor Scale for Preeclampsia Complications (RFSPC) and thefullPIERS (Pre-eclampsia Integrated Estimate of RiSk) scale to predict complications of preeclampsia in pregnant women diagnosed with preeclampsia who were admitted to the obstetrics and gynecology department of a referral hospital, from October 2021 to December 2022. Materials and methods. This was a retrospective cohort design study. Data was collected from the medical records of patients diagnosed with preeclampsia, and both scales (RFSPC and fullPIERS) were applied. With these results, the sensitivity, specificity and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) were obtained by taking different cut-off points. The best score was selected as the one with the highest AUC. The differences between the scales were explored by comparing their AUCs. Results. We included 367 pregnant women. The RFSPC had a sensitivity of 71%, a specificity of 73% and an AUC of 0.722 with a cutoff point of 3 points. Whereas the fullPIERS scale showed 76%, 84% and 0.804 respectively with a cutoff point of 0.75%. Conclusions. Both scales can be useful for identifying pregnant women at risk of complications with cutoff points different from those defined internationally.
