1. Comparison of the effect by which gastric plication and sleeve gastrectomy procedures alter metabolic and physical parameters in an obese type 2 diabetes rodent model 
Min Ye, M.D., Ph.D., Renhong Huang, M.D. M.Sc., Zhijun Min, M.D., Peng Zhang, M.D., Ph.D., Tingfeng Wang, M.D., Ph.D., Bo Yu, M.D., Ph.D. 
Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases 
Volume 13, Issue 11, Pages (November 2017)
DOI: /j.soard
Copyright © 2017 American Society for Bariatric Surgery Terms and Conditions

2. Fig. 1
Surgical procedures for all 3 groups: sham (n = 10), gastric plication (GP) (n = 10), and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) (n = 10). (A) In the sham group, the abdomens of rats were opened, checked, and then closed; the arrow shows the whole stomach outside the abdominal cavity. (B) In the GP group, plication of the greater curvature of stomach was processed with 2 layers; the arrow shows the plication position. (C) In the SG group, two-thirds to three-quarters of the stomach was excised; the arrow shows the stitched torso.
Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases  , DOI: ( /j.soard )
Copyright © 2017 American Society for Bariatric Surgery Terms and Conditions

3. Fig. 2
The weight and food intake of all rats 2 weeks before operation, and 2, 4, and 6 weeks postoperation. (A) There were no statistically significant differences before operation in the gastric plication (GP) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) groups versus the sham group. However, the SG and GP groups lost more weight than the sham group in the second week (GP versus sham, P <.05; SG versus sham, P <.01), fourth week (GP versus sham, P <.05; SG versus sham, P <.05), and sixth week (SG versus sham, P <.05) postoperation. Weight loss was not significantly different between the SG and GP groups. (B) Food intake shows a similar pattern as weight. Compared with the sham group, there were no statistically significant differences before operation, but the SG and GP groups consumed less food after surgery at 2 weeks (GP versus sham, P <.001; SG versus sham, P <.001) and 4 weeks postoperation (GP versus sham, P <.05; SG versus sham, P <.01). The values of all data are shown as mean ± standard error of the mean; * P <.05, **P <.01, *** P <.001.
Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases  , DOI: ( /j.soard )
Copyright © 2017 American Society for Bariatric Surgery Terms and Conditions

4. Fig. 3
Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels of all rats were measured 2 weeks before operation, and at 2, 4, and 6 weeks postoperation. Baseline levels of glucose (6 h fasting) were the same across groups at baseline (2 weeks before surgery). FPG levels in the gastric plication (GP) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) groups were significantly lower than sham at 2 weeks (GP versus sham, P <.05; SG versus sham, P <.05), 4 weeks (GP versus sham, P <.001; SG versus sham, P <.001), and 6 weeks postoperation (GP versus sham, P <.01; SG versus sham, P <.05).
Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases  , DOI: ( /j.soard )
Copyright © 2017 American Society for Bariatric Surgery Terms and Conditions

5. Fig. 4
Intraperitoneal glucose tolerance tests (IPGTTs) were performed 2 weeks before operation and at 2, 4, and 6 weeks postoperation; the AUC for relevant IPGTTs was calculated. (A,B) There were no statistically significant differences between the gastric plication (GP) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) groups versus the sham group at baseline (2 weeks before surgery). The GP and SG procedures improved intraperitoneal glucose tolerance compared with sham at (C,D) 2 weeks, (E,F) 4 weeks, and (G,H) 6 weeks postoperation. Data statistics of the AUC showed that there were significance differences at 2 weeks (GP versus sham, P <.001; SG versus sham, P <.001), 4 weeks (GP versus sham, P <.05; SG versus sham, P <.05), and 6 weeks (GP versus sham, P <.01; SG versus sham, P <.01) postoperation. The values of all data are shown as mean ± standard error of the mean; *P <.05, **P <.01, ***P <.001.
Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases  , DOI: ( /j.soard )
Copyright © 2017 American Society for Bariatric Surgery Terms and Conditions

6. Fig. 5
Metabolic parameters including activity, energy expenditure, and respiratory exchange ratio (RER) were measured at 3 weeks postoperation. (A,B) During the daytime, there were no differences between the activities of the gastric plication (GP) and sham groups (GP versus sham, P <.05) or the sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and sham groups (SG versus sham, P ˂.05). However, the rats in the GP and SG groups had lower activity at night compared to the sham group. (C,D) The GP and SG procedures increased energy expenditure compared to sham. During the daytime, there were no differences between the SG and sham groups (SG versus sham, P <.01), while at night, there was a significant difference between the GP and sham groups (GP versus sham, P <.001) and the SG and sham groups (SG versus sham, P <.001). (E,F) The rats in the GP and SG groups had lower RER compared with the sham group (GP versus sham, P <.001; SG versus sham, P <.001). The values of all data are shown as mean ± standard error of the mean; *P < =.05, **P <.01, and ***P <.001.
Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases  , DOI: ( /j.soard )
Copyright © 2017 American Society for Bariatric Surgery Terms and Conditions

7. Fig. 6
(A) Ghrelin and (B) GLP-1 levels were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay 2 weeks before operation and at 2, 4, and 6 weeks postoperation. In the second week after operation, the levels of ghrelin and glucagon-like peptide (GLP-1) showed no statistically significant differences among the 3 groups. Nevertheless, the gastric plication (GP) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) groups showed reduced levels of ghrelin at week 4 weeks (GP versus sham, P <.05; SG versus sham, P <.01) and 6 weeks (GP versus sham, P <.05; SG versus sham, P <.05). Conversely, the GP and SG groups had significantly increased levels of GLP-1 compared with the sham group 2 weeks (GP versus sham, P <.05; SG versus sham, P <.05), 4 weeks (SG versus sham, P <.05), and 6 weeks postoperation (GP versus sham, P <.05; SG versus sham, P <.05). Values are shown as mean ± standard error of the mean; *P <.05, **P <.01, ***P <.001.
Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases  , DOI: ( /j.soard )
Copyright © 2017 American Society for Bariatric Surgery Terms and Conditions

8. Fig. 7
Intestinal propulsive movement and gastric residue were detected in the sixth week postoperation, after all rats were sacrificed. (A) Distance between the pyloric sphincter and the dye front and between the pyloric sphincter and the terminal ileum were measured. (B) The absorbance of residual pigment was measured at 620 nm. (C) Intestinal propulsive movement percentage of the sleeve gastrectomy (SG) group was lower than the sham and gastric plication (GP) groups (SG versus sham, P <.01; GP versus SG, P <.01). (D) The GP group had a lower residue rate, while the SG group had a higher rate compared with the sham group (GP versus sham, P <.01; SG versus sham, P <.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the GP and SG groups (GP versus GP, P <.05). The values are shown as mean ± standard error of the mean; *P <.05, **P <.01, ***P <.001.
Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases  , DOI: ( /j.soard )
Copyright © 2017 American Society for Bariatric Surgery Terms and Conditions