Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25408433›Full record

ArticleObesity surgery2015

Effectiveness and Safety of Sleeve Gastrectomy, Gastric Bypass, and Adjustable Gastric Banding in Morbidly Obese Patients: a Multicenter, Retrospective, Matched Cohort Study.

Kemal Dogan, Ralph P M Gadiot, Edo O Aarts, Bark Betzel, Cees J H M van Laarhoven, Laser U Biter, Guido H H Mannaerts, Theo J Aufenacker, Ignace M C Janssen, Frits J Berends

Abstract readEvaluation StudyMulticenter 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 39 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 76 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. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kemal DoganDepartment of Surgery, Rijnstate Hospital, Postal number 1190, PO box 9555, 6800 TA, Arnhem, The Netherlands, dogan_kemal@hotmail.com.
Ralph P M Gadiot
Edo O Aarts
Bark Betzel
Cees J H M van Laarhoven
Laser U Biter
Guido H H Mannaerts
Theo J Aufenacker
Ignace M C Janssen
Frits J Berends
Rijnstate Hospital · NLSint Franciscus Gasthuis · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLaparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) are the most performed procedures worldwide (92 %) nowadays. However, comparative clinical trials are scarce in literature. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of the three most performed bariatric procedures.

methodsA multicenter, retrospective, matched cohort study was conducted. Patients were eligible for analysis when a primary procedure was performed between 2007 and 2010 in one of the two specialized bariatric centers. Primary outcome was weight loss, expressed in the percentage excess weight loss (%EWL). Secondary outcome parameters are hospital stay, complication rate, and revisional surgery.

resultsIn total, 735 patients, 245 in each group, were included for analysis. The groups were comparable for age and gender after matching. Mean postoperative follow-up was 3.1 ± 1.2 years. LAGB patients showed less %EWL compared to LSG and LRYGB at all postoperative follow-up visits. LRYGB showed a %EWL of 71 ± 20 % compared to LSG (76 ± 23 %; p=0.008) after 1-year follow-up; thereafter, no significant difference was observed. After 3 years of follow-up, LAGB showed a higher complication rate compared to LSG and LRYGB (p<0.05). Revisional surgery after LAGB was needed in 21 %, while 9 % of the LSG underwent conversion to RYGB.

conclusionsLRYGB is a safe and effective treatment in morbid obese patients with good long-term outcomes. LSG seems to be an appropriate alternative as a definitive procedure, in terms of weight reduction and complication rate. LAGB is inferior to both LRYGB and LSG.

Indexed as

GastrectomyGastric BypassGastroplastyAdultCase-Control StudiesCohort StudiesFemaleHumansLaparoscopyLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedObesity, MorbidReoperationRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID25408433
OpenAlexW2037840564

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.