Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18553197›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2008

Perforated marginal ulcers after laparoscopic gastric bypass.

Edward L Felix, John Kettelle, Elijah Mobley, Daniel Swartz

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Guideline
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Early and late complications of bariatric operation.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Essential bariatric emergencies for the acute care surgeon.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2016
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Edward L FelixUCSF Fresno Department of Surgery, Clovis Hospital, Fresno, CA 93710, USA. elfelixmd@aol.com
John Kettelle
Elijah Mobley
Daniel Swartz
California State University, Fresno · USClovis Community College · USClovis Oncology (United States) · USUniversity of Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPerforated marginal ulcer (PMU) after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is a serious complication, but its incidence and etiology have rarely been investigated. Therefore, a retrospective review of all patients undergoing LRYGB at the authors' center was conducted to determine the incidence of PMU and whether any causative factors were present.

methodsA prospectively kept database of all patients at the authors' bariatric center was retrospectively reviewed. The complete records of patients with a PMU were examined individually for accuracy and analyzed for treatment, outcome, and possible underlying causes of the marginal perforation.

resultsBetween April 1999 and August 2007, 1% of the patients (35/3,430) undergoing laparoscopic gastric bypass experienced one or more perforated marginal ulcers 3 to 70 months (median, 18 months) after LRYGB. The patients with and without perforation were not significantly different in terms of mean age (37 vs 41 years), weight (286 vs 287 lb), body mass index (BMI) (46 vs 47), or female gender (89% vs 83%). Of the patients with perforations, 2 (6%) were taking steroids, 10 (29%) were receiving nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) at the time of the perforation, 18 (51%) were actively smoking, and 6 of the smokers also were taking NSAIDs. Eleven of the patients (31%) who perforated did not have at least one of these possible risk factors, but 4 (36%) of the 11 patients in this group had been treated after bypass for a marginal ulcer. Only 7 (20%) of the 35 patients who had laparoscopic bypass, or 7 (0.2%) in the entire group of 3,430 patients, perforated without any warning. There were no deaths, but three patients reperforated.

conclusionsThe incidence of a marginal ulcer perforating after LRYGB was significant (>1%) and appeared to be related to smoking or the use of NSAIDs or steroids. Because only 0.2% of all patients acutely perforated without some risk factor or warning, long-term ulcer prophylaxis or treatment may be necessary for only a select group of high-risk patients.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyAdultFemaleGastric BypassHumansIncidenceMalePeptic Ulcer PerforationRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID18553197
OpenAlexW1986170395

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.