Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20803358›Full record

ArticleObesity surgery2010

Obstetrical and neonatal outcomes of pregnancies following gastric bypass surgery: a retrospective cohort study in a French referral centre.

Pietro Santulli, Laurent Mandelbrot, Enrico Facchiano, Chloé Dussaux, Pierre-François Ceccaldi, Séverine Ledoux, Simon Msika

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity surgery, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Pregnancy after bariatric surgery: Consensus recommendations for periconception, antenatal and postnatal care.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2019
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Bariatric Surgery: A Perspective for Primary Care.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2017
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors.

Pietro SantulliDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Louis Mourier Hospital, 178 rue des Renouillers, 92700, Colombes, France.
Laurent Mandelbrot
Enrico Facchiano
Chloé Dussaux
Pierre-François Ceccaldi
Séverine Ledoux
Simon Msika

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of this study was to analyze obstetrical and neonatal outcomes following Roux en Y Gastric Bypass procedures (RYGBP).

methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted in a single French tertiary perinatal care and bariatric center. The study involved 24 pregnancies, following RYGBP (exposed group) and two different control groups (non-exposed groups). A body mass index (BMI)-matched control group included 120 pregnancies matched for age, parity, and pregnancy BMI. A normal BMI control group included 120 pregnancies with normal BMI (18.5-24.9 kg/m(2)), matched for age and parity. Hospital data were reviewed from all groups in the same 6-year period. Obstetrical and neonatal outcomes after RYGB were compared, separately, to the two different-matched control groups.

resultsThe median interval from RYGBP to conception was 26.6 (range: 3-74) months. Rates of perinatal complications did not differ significantly between the RYGBP group and normal BMI and BMI-matched controls groups. The rate of Cesarean section before labor was higher in the RYGBP patients than in the normal BMI control group (25% vs. 9.3% respectively, p = 0.04). Weight gain was lower in the RYGBP patients than normal BMI control group (5.8 kg vs. 13.2 kg respectively, p < 0.0001). Birthweight was also lower in the RYGBP group than those in normal BMI and BMI-matched controls groups (2,948.2 g vs. 3,368.2 g and 3,441.8 g, respectively, p < 0.0001).

conclusionsRYGBP surgery was associated with reduced birthweight, suggesting a possible role of nutritional growth restriction in pregnancy.

Indexed as

Infant, Low Birth WeightPregnancy OutcomeAdultCohort StudiesFemaleFetal Growth RetardationGastric BypassHumansInfant, NewbornObesityPregnancyRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

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.