Intragastric Balloon Treatment for Obesity: FDA Safety Updates

<p><strong>Article full text</strong></p> <p><br> The full text of this article can be found <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-017-0647-z"><b>here</b>.</a><br> <br> <strong>Provide enhanced digital features for this article</strong><br> If you are an author of this publication and would like to provide additional enhanced digital features for your article then please contact <u>[email protected]</u>.<br> <br> The journal offers a range of additional features designed to increase visibility and readership. All features will be thoroughly peer reviewed to ensure the content is of the highest scientific standard and all features are marked as ‘peer reviewed’ to ensure readers are aware that the content has been reviewed to the same level as the articles they are being presented alongside. Moreover, all sponsorship and disclosure information is included to provide complete transparency and adherence to good publication practices. This ensures that however the content is reached the reader has a full understanding of its origin. No fees are charged for hosting additional open access content.<br> <br> Other enhanced features include, but are not limited to:<br> • Slide decks<br> • Videos and animations<br> • Audio abstracts<br> • Audio slides<u></u></p

Stress condition differences by weight group for food vs. non-food contrast: Corresponding slices for stress and non-stress conditions.

The left column illustrates the stress condition effect for the lean group (right), along with the corresponding slices in stress and non-stress conditions (left). The right column gives the same for the obese group. Obese indicates all obese participants (binge eating and non-binge eating); dlPFC, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; SP, superior parietal cortex; OFC, orbitofrontal cortex; PMC, premotor cortex; SMA, supplementary motor area. (PPTX)</p

Weight group differences for high-ED vs. low-ED food contrast in non-stress condition.

Representative 2-dimensional axial slices highlighting areas showing between-group differences in activation for high-ED vs. low-ED food cues. No evidence of group similarities was found. Obese indicates all obese participants (binge eating and non-binge eating). OFC indicates orbitofrontal cortex; MTG, middle temporal gyrus; BS, brainstem; Cer, cerebellum; PH, parahippocampal gyrus; Thal, thalamus; Caud, caudate; Cu, cuneus; dACC, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex; dlPFC, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; SMA, supplementary motor area; PCu, precuneus.</p

Total ad libitum meal intake (mean+SE) by weight group and condition.

Total ad libitum meal intake (mean+SE) by weight group and condition.</p

S12 Fig -

a. Binge eating group differences by stress condition for low-ED vs. high-ED food contrast. Both columns illustrate areas showing differential activation for the high-ED vs low-ED contrast between groups (BE vs. NB), with effects in the non-stress condition shown on the left column, and effects in the stress condition on the right column.; Cer indicates cerebellum; OFC, orbitofrontal cortex; Caud, caudate; IP, inferior parietal cortex; Cu, cuneus; dACC, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex; Sens-Mot, sensorimotor cortex; SMA, supplementary motor area; MTG, middle temporal gyrus; Thal, thalamus; sPFC, superior prefrontal cortex. b. Stress condition differences by binge eating group for high-ED vs. low-ED food contrast. Both columns illustrate areas showing differential activation for the high-ED vs low-ED contrast between stress and non-stress conditions, with effects for the NB group shown on the left column, and effects for the BE group on the right column; dlPFC indicates dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; Cu, cuneus; Sens-Mot, sensorimotor cortex; MTG, middle temporal gyrus; OFC, orbitofrontal cortex; IFG, inferior frontal gyrus. (ZIP)</p

Stress condition similarities and differences by weight group for food vs. non-food contrast.

The central columns show representative 2-dimensional axial slices highlighting areas showing above threshold activation in both stress and non-stress conditions for food (high-ED and low-ED) compared with non-food cues in the lean (central left) and obese (central right) columns. The side columns illustrate areas showing differential activation between conditions, with effects for the lean group shown on the far left, and effects for the obese group on the far right. Obese indicates all obese participants (binge eating and non-binge eating); dlPFC indicates dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; SP, superior parietal cortex; IP, inferior parietal cortex; Cer, cerebellum, OFC, orbitofrontal cortex; MTG, middle temporal gyrus; Ins, insula; Thal, thalamus; dACC, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex; PMC, premotor cortex; PCu, precuneus; Cu, cuneus; SMA, supplementary motor area.</p

Wanting scores (mean+SE) for each cue type by weight group and condition.

Wanting scores (mean+SE) for each cue type by weight group and condition.</p

S1 File -

(DOCX)</p

Weight group differences in beta estimates for food vs. non-food contrast in non-stress condition.

MTG, middle temporal gyrus; SMG, supramarginal gyrus; ilPFC, inferolateral prefrontal cortex; dlPFC, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. (PPTX)</p

Wanting scores for each cue type by binge eating sub-group and condition.

(PPTX)</p