Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25105982›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2014

Surgery for weight loss in adults.

Jill L Colquitt, Karen Pickett, Emma Loveman, Geoff K Frampton

7 registry-linked trialsOpen access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 7 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 719 papers, 19 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
719citing papers in PubMed, 19 pooled it
116.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT02601092 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Versus Laparoscopic Mini Gastric Bypass: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorSpital Limmattal SchlierenRan2016 to 2020Enrolled80ConditionsObesity, Bypass ComplicationsArmsMini Gastric Bypass, Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass
NCT03008096 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy as Bridge-to-Candidacy for Obese Left-Ventricular Assist Device Patients

TypeinterventionalSponsorPhilipp AngleitnerRan2016 to 2018Enrolled10ConditionsHeart Failure, ObesityArmsLaparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy
NCT03556995 completednot on this map

Score Scale to Assess Risk of Bleeding in Bariatric Surgery

TypeobservationalSponsorAssuta Medical CenterRan2013 to 2018Enrolled9,044ConditionsObesity, Bariatric Surgery Candidate, Complication, BleedingArmsbariatric surgery patients
NCT04207424 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

EMbolisation Bariatrique de l'ARcade Gastro-épiploïque Chez Les Patients Obèses

TypeinterventionalSponsorIHU StrasbourgRan2020 to 2025Enrolled0ConditionsMorbid ObesityArmsEmblization of the gastro-epiploic arcade
NCT05390203 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Sexual Function Before and After Bariatric Surgeries.

TypeobservationalSponsorAssiut UniversityRan2022 to 2024Enrolled55ConditionsSexual DysfunctionArmsPenile duplex study, Hormonal Assay (Total Testosterone, Prolactin and E2)
NCT05715892 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

An Observational Study Investigating The Experiences of Patients In Gastric Bypass Clinical Trials

TypeobservationalSponsorPower Life Sciences Inc.Ran2024 to 2026Enrolled500ConditionsGastric Bypass, Weight Loss Surgery
NCT06020105 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Design and Development of a Nurse-led Program for the Management of Bariatric Surgery Patients - The NURLIFE Program

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ÉvoraRan2024 to 2025Enrolled80ConditionsBariatric Surgery Candidate, Nurse-Patient RelationsArmsNURLIFE
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

719 citing papers in PubMed, 19 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,505 citations in OpenAlex.

  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. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Quality of Life after Bariatric Surgery-A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Trial

659 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jill L ColquittSouthampton Health Technology Assessments Centre, University of Southampton, First Floor, Epsilon House, Enterprise Road, Southampton Science Park, Chilworth, Southampton, Hampshire, UK, SO16 7NS.
Karen Pickett
Emma Loveman
Geoff K Frampton
University of Southampton · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBariatric (weight loss) surgery for obesity is considered when other treatments have failed. The effects of the available bariatric procedures compared with medical management and with each other are uncertain. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003 and most recently updated in 2009.

objectivesTo assess the effects of bariatric surgery for overweight and obesity, including the control of comorbidities. SEARCH

methodsStudies were obtained from searches of numerous databases, supplemented with searches of reference lists and consultation with experts in obesity research. Date of last search was November 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical interventions with non-surgical management of obesity or overweight or comparing different surgical procedures. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted by one review author and checked by a second review author. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and evaluated overall study quality utilising the GRADE instrument. MAIN

resultsTwenty-two trials with 1798 participants were included; sample sizes ranged from 15 to 250. Most studies followed participants for 12, 24 or 36 months; the longest follow-up was 10 years. The risk of bias across all domains of most trials was uncertain; just one was judged to have adequate allocation concealment.All seven RCTs comparing surgery with non-surgical interventions found benefits of surgery on measures of weight change at one to two years follow-up. Improvements for some aspects of health-related quality of life (QoL) (two RCTs) and diabetes (five RCTs) were also found. The overall quality of the evidence was moderate. Five studies reported data on mortality, no deaths occurred. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in four studies and ranged from 0% to 37% in the surgery groups and 0% to 25% in the no surgery groups. Between 2% and 13% of participants required reoperations in the five studies that reported these data.Three RCTs found that laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (L)(RYGB) achieved significantly greater weight loss and body mass index (BMI) reduction up to five years after surgery compared with laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). Mean end-of-study BMI was lower following LRYGB compared with LAGB: mean difference (MD) -5.2 kg/m² (95% confidence interval (CI) -6.4 to -4.0; P < 0.00001; 265 participants; 3 trials; moderate quality evidence). Evidence for QoL and comorbidities was very low quality. The LRGYB procedure resulted in greater duration of hospitalisation in two RCTs (4/3.1 versus 2/1.5 days) and a greater number of late major complications (26.1% versus 11.6%) in one RCT. In one RCT the LAGB required high rates of reoperation for band removal (9 patients, 40.9%).Open RYGB, LRYGB and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) led to losses of weight and/or BMI but there was no consistent picture as to which procedure was better or worse in the seven included trials. MD was -0.2 kg/m² (95% CI -1.8 to 1.3); 353 participants; 6 trials; low quality evidence) in favour of LRYGB.  No statistically significant differences in QoL were found (one RCT). Six RCTs reported mortality; one death occurred following LRYGB. SAEs were reported by one RCT and were higher in the LRYGB group (4.5%) than the LSG group (0.9%). Reoperations ranged from 6.7% to 24% in the LRYGB group and 3.3% to 34% in the LSG group. Effects on comorbidities, complications and additional surgical procedures were neutral, except gastro-oesophageal reflux disease improved following LRYGB (one RCT). One RCT of people with a BMI 25 to 35 and type 2 diabetes found laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass resulted in greater weight loss and improvement of diabetes compared with LSG, and had similar levels of complications.Two RCTs found that biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BDDS) resulted in greater weight loss than RYGB in morbidly obese patients. End-of-study mean BMI loss was greater following BDDS: MD -7.3 kg/m² (95% CI -9.3 to -5.4); P < 0.00001; 107 participants; 2 trials; moderate quality evidence). QoL was similar on most domains. In one study between 82% to 100% of participants with diabetes had a HbA1c of less than 5% three years after surgery. Reoperations were higher in the BDDS group (16.1% to 27.6%) than the LRYGB group (4.3% to 8.3%). One death occurred in the BDDS group.One RCT comparing laparoscopic duodenojejunal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy versus LRYGB found BMI, excess weight loss, and rates of remission of diabetes and hypertension were similar at 12 months follow-up (very low quality evidence). QoL, SAEs and reoperation rates were not reported. No deaths occurred in either group.One RCT comparing laparoscopic isolated sleeve gastrectomy (LISG) versus LAGB found greater improvement in weight-loss outcomes following LISG at three years follow-up (very low quality evidence). QoL, mortality and SAEs were not reported. Reoperations occurred in 20% of the LAGB group and in 10% of the LISG group.One RCT (unpublished) comparing laparoscopic gastric imbrication with LSG found no statistically significant difference in weight loss between groups (very low quality evidence).  QoL and comorbidities were not reported. No deaths occurred. Two participants in the gastric imbrication group required reoperation. AUTHORS'

conclusionsSurgery results in greater improvement in weight loss outcomes and weight associated comorbidities compared with non-surgical interventions, regardless of the type of procedures used. When compared with each other, certain procedures resulted in greater weight loss and improvements in comorbidities than others. Outcomes were similar between RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy, and both of these procedures had better outcomes than adjustable gastric banding. For people with very high BMI, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch resulted in greater weight loss than RYGB. Duodenojejunal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic RYGB had similar outcomes, however this is based on one small trial. Isolated sleeve gastrectomy led to better weight-loss outcomes than adjustable gastric banding after three years follow-up. This was based on one trial only.  Weight-related outcomes were similar between laparoscopic gastric imbrication and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in one trial. Across all studies adverse event rates and reoperation rates were generally poorly reported. Most trials followed participants for only one or two years, therefore the long-term effects of surgery remain unclear.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleGastric BypassGastroplastyHumansLigationMaleObesity, MorbidRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicWeight Loss

Identifiers

PMID25105982
PMCPMC9028049
OpenAlexW2147344182

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

and 1 more above

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.