ArticleJAMA surgery2015
Comparing Medical Costs and Use After Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding and Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.
Article in JAMA surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Healthcare utilisation across five years among adolescents following metabolic-bariatric surgery; a prospective observational study.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- From Panacea to Problem: Why Bariatric Surgery Demands Relentless and Complete Long-Term Follow-Up.Obesity surgery · 2025Article
- The value of metabolic surgery for patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes in Romania.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Out-of-pocket Costs for Commercially-insured Patients in the Years Following Bariatric Surgery: Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.Annals of surgery · 2023Article
- Does bariatric surgery reduce future hospital costs? A propensity score-matched analysis using UK Biobank Study data.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2021Article
- Association of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass With Postoperative Health Care Use and Expenditures in Canada.JAMA surgery · 2020Article
- Association Between Bariatric Surgery and Long-term Health Care Expenditures Among Veterans With Severe Obesity.JAMA surgery · 2019Article
- Long-Term Inpatient Hospital Utilisation and Costs (2007-2008 to 2015-2016) for Publicly Waitlisted Bariatric Surgery Patients in an Australian Public Hospital System Based on Australia's Activity-Based Funding Model.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2019Article
- Recent advances in metabolic and bariatric surgery.F1000Research · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
importanceThere is conflicting evidence about how different bariatric procedures impact health care use.
objectiveTo compare the impact of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (AGB) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) on health care use and costs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsRetrospective interrupted time series with comparison series study using a national claims data set. The data analysis was initiated in September 2011 and completed in January 2015. We identified bariatric surgery patients aged 18 to 64 years who underwent a first AGB or RYGB between 2005 and 2011. We propensity score matched 4935 AGB to 4935 RYGB patients according to baseline age group, sex, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic variables, comorbidities, year of procedure and baseline costs, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospital days. Median postoperative follow-up time was 2.5 years. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Quarterly and yearly total health care costs, ED visits, hospital days, and prescription drug costs. We used segmented regression to compare pre-to-post changes in level and trend of these measures in the AGB vs the RYGB groups and difference-in-differences analysis to estimate the magnitude of difference by year.
resultsBoth AGB and RYGB were associated with downward trends in costs; however, by year 3, AGB patients had total annual costs that were 16% higher than RYGB patients (P < .001; absolute change: $818; 95% CI, $278 to $1357). In postoperative years 1 and 2, AGB was associated with 27% to 29% fewer ED visits than RYGB (P < .001; absolute changes: -0.6; 95% CI, -0.9 to -0.4 and -0.4; 95% CI, -0.6 to -0.1 visits/person, respectively); however, by year 3, there were no detectable differences. Postoperative annual hospital days were not significantly different between the groups. Although both procedures lowered prescription costs, annual postoperative prescription costs were 17% to 32% higher for AGB patients than RYGB patients (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Both laparoscopic AGB and RYGB were associated with flattened total health care cost trajectories but RYGB patients experienced lower total and prescription costs by 3 years postsurgery. On the other hand, RYGB was associated with increased ED visits in the 2 years after surgery. Clinicians and policymakers should weigh such differences in use and costs when making recommendations or shaping regulatory guidance about these procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.