Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24352748›Full record

Observational studyObesity surgery2014

Laparoscopic gastric bypass vs. sleeve gastrectomy in the super obese patient: early outcomes of an observational study.

Carlos Zerrweck, Elisa M Sepúlveda, Hernán G Maydón, Francisco Campos, Antonio G Spaventa, Verónica Pratti, Itzel Fernández

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Obesity surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 8 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Sleeve Gastrectomy Compared with Gastric Bypass for Morbidly Obese Patients with End Stage Renal Disease: a Decision Analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2020
    Article
  20. Observational
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.

Carlos ZerrweckThe Obesity Clinic at Hospital General "Dr. Rubén Leñero", Mexico City, Mexico, zerrweck@yahoo.com.
Elisa M Sepúlveda
Hernán G Maydón
Francisco Campos
Antonio G Spaventa
Verónica Pratti
Itzel Fernández

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSuper obesity [body mass index (BMI) > 50 kg/m2] can yield to higher morbidity/mortality in bariatric surgery, this could be related to patient's characteristics and/or surgeon's experience. In morbid obesity, both techniques proved to have a positive impact and sometimes comparable outcomes during the first 2 years. This has not been clearly analyzed in the super obese patient.

methodsRetrospective study comparing the records of 77 consecutive super obese patients (BMI: 50-59.9 kg/m2) submitted to either laparoscopic gastric bypass (LGBP, n = 32) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG, n = 45) between 2010 and 2012 at a single institution. The primary objective was to analyze baseline demographics, comorbidities, operative outcomes, and early complications (<30 days). Secondarily, weight loss [BMI and % excess weight loss (%EWL)] was also described and compared during the first year.

resultsFemale sex comprised 72.7 % of all cases. Both groups had comparable BMI (52.7 ± 2.1 kg/m2 for LGBP vs. 53.87 ± 2.8 kg/m2 for LSG; p = 0.087) and homogeneous baseline characteristics. Operative time was lower for the LSG group (113.1 ± 35.3 vs. 186.9 ± 39 min for LGBP; p ≤ 0.001). Overall, early complications were observed in 16.8% of patients (LGBP 9% vs. LSG 22%; p = 0.217). There were four major complications (two in each group), with two reinterventions. Weight loss (%EWL) at 6, 9, and 12 months was significantly higher in the LGBP group (51.6 ± 12.9%, 56.5 ± 13%, 63.9 ± 13.3%, respectively) than in the LSG group (40 ± 12.8%, 45.1 ± 15.5%, 43.9 ± 10.4%, respectively).

conclusionsJust like in morbid obesity, LGBP and LSG are effective and safe procedures in super obese patients. LGBP had better weight loss at 1 year.

Indexed as

GastrectomyGastric BypassLaparoscopyWeight LossAdultBody Mass IndexComorbidityFemaleGastric BalloonHumansMaleObesity, MorbidRetrospective StudiesSeverity of Illness IndexTime FactorsTreatment Outcome

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.