Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24563069›Full record

ArticleObesity surgery2014

Improving outcome of bariatric surgery: best practices in an accredited surgical center.

Maher El Chaar, Leonardo Claros, George C Ezeji, Maureen Miletics, Jill Stoltzfus

Abstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Indications for Revisions Following 630 Consecutive Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Cases: Experience in a Single Accredited Center.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2017
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maher El ChaarDepartment of Surgery, Division of Bariatric and Minimally Invasive Surgery, The Medical School of Temple University/St Luke's University Hospital and Health Network, 1736 Hamilton Boulevard, Allentown, PA, 18104, USA, Maher.ElChaar@sluhn.org.
Leonardo Claros
George C Ezeji
Maureen Miletics
Jill Stoltzfus
Temple University · USSt. Luke's University Health Network · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The number of laparoscopic bariatric procedures being performed in the USA has increased dramatically in the past decade. Because of limited health-care resources, hospital administrators and insurance carriers are placing emphasis on length of stay and patient outcomes. The goal of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of a clinical pathway in managing patients undergoing bariatric surgery in a Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) accredited center. The setting was a university hospital in USA. A retrospective analysis of data collected prospectively on patients undergoing bariatric surgery at St Luke's University was performed. Patients included underwent either a laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric Bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Patients were subjected to a clinical protocol and discharged when discharge criteria were met. The primary outcomes were length of stay, 30 day readmission, complication, and reoperation rates. A cost analysis of the savings accrued was also performed. Two hundred twenty-nine patients were included in our analysis (80.4% females and 19.6% males). Seventy-one patients (31%) underwent LSG, and 158 patients (69%) underwent LRYGB. The average length of stay was 32.45 h (range 24-72 h). The 30-day readmission rate was 3.0% (7/229 patients). The 30 day complication rate (including intervention, reintubation, and reoperation) was 2.6% (6/229). The 30 day mortality rate was 0. The average prospective cost savings were $2,016 and $1,209 per LRYGB and LSG patient, respectively. Our bariatric surgery clinical protocol is feasible and safe with substantial prospective cost savings at St Luke's University and Health Network. Patients subjected to our protocol have low readmission and complication rates. Further studies are needed to fully elucidate the benefit of this innovative new protocol in bariatric surgery.

Indexed as

Bariatric SurgeryLaparoscopyWeight LossAdultClinical ProtocolsCost-Benefit AnalysisFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleObesity, MorbidPostoperative ComplicationsPractice Guidelines as TopicReoperationRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID24563069
OpenAlexW2069106004

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.