Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25085223›Full record

ArticleObesity surgery2015

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a single center experience with 2 years follow-up.

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

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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
  15. Article
  16. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

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

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG) is a relatively new procedure that is gaining wide acceptance. However, laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (LRYGB) remains one of the most commonly performed bariatric procedures with the best long-term results. There are few studies comparing LSG with LRYGB. The aim of this study is to compare the safety and outcome of LSG to LRYG in a single accredited center.

methodsA retrospective analysis of data collected prospectively on patients undergoing either LSG or LRYGB between January 2009 and December 2012 was performed. LSG was performed using 36Fr bougie, while LRYGB was perfromed with a 25-mm circular stapler. The primary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), 30-day complication and readmission rates, and excess weight loss (%EWL) at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. LSG patients were also divided into different categories based on BMI and their %EWL compared to LRYGB.

resultsA total of 885 patients were included in our analysis. 547 patients underwent LRYGB (61.8 %) and 338 underwent LSG (38.2 %). Thirty-day complication and readmission rates for LRYGB and LSG were (1.5 and 5.1 % vs 0.6 and 0.3 %, respetively, p > 0.05). %EWL for LRYGB was significantly higher than LSG at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. LSG with a BMI <40 achieved a similar %EWL to LRYGB in the first 12 months.

conclusionsLSG seems to have a better safety profile in the short-term compared to LRYGB. However, at 2 years, LRYGB patients achieved a significantly higher EWL compared to LSG patients. Randomized clinical trials are needed to better elucidate our findings.

Indexed as

GastrectomyGastric BypassAdultFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedObesityRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeWeight Loss

Identifiers

PMID25085223
OpenAlexW2066415837

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.