Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26675939›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2016

Endoscopic revision of gastric bypass: Holy Grail or Epic fail?

Alberto S Gallo, Christopher G DuCoin, Martin A Berducci, Diego F Nino, Moneer Almadani, Bryan J Sandler, Santiago Horgan, Garth R Jacobsen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Endobariatric systems: Strategic integration of endoscopic therapies in the management of obesity.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2024
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Endoscopic therapy of weight regain after bariatric surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2021
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alberto S GalloMinimally Invasive Surgery Department, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA. betogallo78@gmail.com.
Christopher G DuCoinMinimally Invasive Surgery Department, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
Martin A BerducciMinimally Invasive Surgery Department, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
Diego F NinoMinimally Invasive Surgery Department, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
Moneer AlmadaniMinimally Invasive Surgery Department, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
Bryan J SandlerMinimally Invasive Surgery Department, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
Santiago HorganMinimally Invasive Surgery Department, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
Garth R JacobsenMinimally Invasive Surgery Department, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
University of California, San Diego · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundApproximately 20-30 % of patients who undergo Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) will not meet the goals of weight loss surgery. Revisional surgery is associated with higher morbidity compared to initial operative management, and results in terms of weight loss have been inconsistent. Endoscopic plication has been seen as a less invasive option, with encouraging initial results. The objective was to analyze the outcomes after Restorative Obesity Surgery, Endolumenal (ROSE) procedure.

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent ROSE between 5/2008 and 11/2013. All patients had failure of weight loss or regain weight after RYGB. Demographics, operative data, and follow-up were recorded.

resultsTwenty-seven patients underwent ROSE. One patient was excluded due to lack of follow-up. Twenty-five (96 %) patients were female. Mean time since initial RYGB was 11.9 ± 4.3 years. Mean initial weight and BMI were 236 ± 47 lb and 40.6 ± 8.1 kg/m(2), respectively. Mean OR time was 77 ± 30 min. Preoperative average pouch length and stoma diameter were 6.8 ± 2.3 and 2.1 ± 0.7 cm, respectively. On average, 4 ± 1.6 stitches were placed. Final pouch length and stoma diameter were 3.4 ± 1.6 (50 % reduction) and 0.86 ± 0.4 cm (61 % reduction). A total of 12 (46 %) and seven (28 %) patients underwent EGD at 3 and 12 months postoperatively. The mean pouch length and stoma diameter were 5 ± 1.9 (26.5 % reduction) and 1.2 ± 0.7 cm (42.9 % reduction) at 3 months and 6.14 ± 1.6 (10 % reduction) and 2.2 ± 1.2 cm (4.7 % increase) at 12 months, respectively. The %EWL was 8.9, 9.3, 8, 6.7, -10.7, -13.5, -5.8, -4.5 at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 72 months, respectively.

conclusionAlthough endoscopic plication achieved the intended reduction in the pouch and stoma diameter at 3 months, these tend toward the preoperative diameter at 12 months. This anatomical failure and the lack of follow-up may explain why most patients failed to achieve sustainable weight loss.

Indexed as

AdultAgedFemaleGastric BypassGastroscopyHumansMaleMiddle AgedObesity, MorbidReoperationRetrospective StudiesTreatment FailureEndoscopic revisionGastric bypassNOTESObesity surgeryRevisional surgeryROSE

Identifiers

PMID26675939
OpenAlexW2218353765

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.